MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2222627577

A probabilistic model of early argument structure acquisition

2008· dissertation· en· W2222627577 on OpenAlexaff
Afra Alishahi

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingProbabilistic logicFeature (linguistics)VerbNatural languageArgument (complex analysis)Object languageLanguage acquisitionLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing computational algorithms that capture the complex structure of natural language is an open problem. In particular, learning the abstract properties of language only from usage data remains a challenge. In this dissertation, we present a probabilistic usage-based model of verb argument structure acquisition that can successfully learn abstract knowledge of language from instances of verb usage, and use this knowledge in various language tasks. The model demonstrates the feasibility of a usage-based account of language learning, and provides concrete explanation for the observed patterns in child language acquisition. We propose a novel representation for the general constructions of language as probabilistic associations between syntactic and semantic features of a verb usage; these associations generalize over the syntactic patterns and the fine-grained semantics of both the verb and its arguments. The probabilistic nature of argument structure constructions in the model enables it to capture both statistical effects in language learning, and adaptability in language use. The acquisition of constructions is modeled as detecting similar usages and grouping them together. We use a probabilistic measure of similarity between

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), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207