MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2215853977

Vývoj moderní teorie terminologie a česká terminologická tradice

2009· article· cs· W2215853977 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ivana Bozděchová

Bibliographic record

Venue슬라브어 연구 · 2009
Typearticle
Languagecs
FieldArts and Humanities
Topiclinguistics and terminology studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyCzechLinguisticsGermanVocabularyObjectivismApplied linguisticsPolishSociologyPhilosophyEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theory of terminology was developed by the founder of the Vienna school, Wuster, on objectivist foundations (a term as a linguistic symbol formed by words or elements of words, the structured nature of the vocabulary) with the aim of standardising the concepts and terms. The main schools of the theory of terminology were established approximately at the same time in Vienna, Prague, and Moscow and later also in Quebec. Czech terminography derives its tradition from the Prague Linguistic Circle (Havranek, Roudny, Tejnor, Kocourek), whose aim was the structural and functional description of specialised language and the standardisation of terminology by authoritative institutions. Its concept of specialised language as part of specialised communication was developed in the 1970s in connection with the communicative and pragmatic orientation of linguistics as a socioterminological trend (in France and Canada). Modern terminology moves from an onomasiological approach to a communicative one (Sager); more recently use is made of the findings of cognitive science and of language corpora for the collection of excerpts (Temmerman).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue슬라브어 연구Same topiclinguistics and terminology studiesFrench-language works237,207