MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Syntax and Semantics of Floating Numeral Quantifiers

2008· book· en· W2231646746 on OpenAlex
Kimiko Nakanishi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2008
Typebook
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNumeral systemSyntaxLocalityComputer scienceSemantics (computer science)Dependency (UML)LinguisticsRelation (database)Artificial intelligenceProgramming languagePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates the two competing views on floating numeral quantifiers (FNQs)—that is, numerals that appear away from their host NPs. One view holds that FNQs are transformationally derived from their nonfloating counterparts, whereas the other assumes no transformational relation. The article also compares the two by investigating how they fare with various syntactic and semantic properties of FNQs. FNQs serve as a powerful tool for investigating Japanese syntax. The stranding view advanced by Miyagawa observes that there are certain locality restrictions on the dependency between an FNQ and its host NP. The research on Japanese FNQs has been advanced a great deal over the past few decades, although many questions still remain unanswered. It is hoped that this article will serve as a partial overview of what has been done and sheds light on some of the issues which require further investigation.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.170 · 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