MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lexical-Functional Grammar

2012· book-chapter· en· W2162501006 on OpenAlexaff
Ash Asudeh, Ida Toivonen

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenerative grammarComputer scienceSection (typography)LinguisticsGrammarHead-driven phrase structure grammarNatural language processingLexical functional grammarPhrase structure rulesArtificial intelligenceConstraint (computer-aided design)Mildly context-sensitive grammar formalismMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG) is a theory of generative grammar. The goal is to explain the native speaker's knowledge of language by specifying a grammar that models the speaker's knowledge explicitly and which is distinct from the computational mechanisms that constitute the language processor. This chapter is organized as follows. Section 15.2 discusses the two syntactic structures posited by LFG: constituent structure (c-structure) and functional structure (f-structure). LFG distinguishes between formal structures and structural descriptions that well-formed structures must satisfy. The structural descriptions are sets of constraints. A constraint is a statement that is either true or false of a structure. Section 15.3 provides an overview of the most important sorts of constraints. Section 17.4 explains how c-structure and f-structure are related by structural correspondences. Section 17.5 describes the Correspondence Architecture. Section 17.6 considers some recent developments in LFG.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207