MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321899529 · doi:10.1515/sem-2014-0053

Phytosemiotics revisited: Botanical behavior and sign transduction

2014· article· en· W2321899529 on OpenAlex
Kane Faucher

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

VenueSemiotica · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and Biological Electrophysiology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalience (neuroscience)UmweltEpistemologyTransduction (biophysics)Cognitive scienceSign (mathematics)PhilosophyPsychologyBiologyCommunicationCognitive psychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will position the debate on plant intelligence as central to determining the efficacy of establishing a phytosemiotics proper. Memory, learning, and indexical salience may be operative features in determining plant intelligence and thus a ground for a more rigorous phytosemiotics. In order to move beyond the taxonomic boundary, we will consider phytosemiotics as receiving greater or lesser support from the Uexkull's concept of the Umwelt and Simondon's concept of metastability and transduction. It will be concluded that Simondon's ideas are more conducive to an explanation of emergence and becoming as useful tools in a future phytosemiotics, but that it resists any hylomorphist approach to understanding plant intelligence and behavior.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.196 · 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