MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327588828 · doi:10.1515/cllt.2011.008

Safe harbour: Ethics and accessibility in sociolinguistic corpus building

2011· article· en· W2327588828 on OpenAlex
Becky Childs, Gerard Van Herk, Jennifer Thorburn

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

VenueCorpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobeCorpus linguisticsLinguisticsComputer scienceApplied linguisticsComputational linguisticsSociologyData sharingNatural language processingPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the move towards the sharing of linguistic data, sociolinguists are now considering, more than ever, methods for creating corpora that maintain requisite ethical principles while still allowing for data to be used by researchers from around the globe. This paper examines the guiding principles used to create a sociolinguistic corpus that would permit sharing without compromising commitments to informants, from the interview stage to transcription, verification, and anonymization. We consider and adapt theory and practice from fields such as corpus linguistics, anthropology, and sociology.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.270 · 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