MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330714393 · doi:10.1515/sem-2014-0055

The sign in Heidegger's Sein und Zeit

2014· article· de· W2330714393 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSemiotica · 2014
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldPsychology
TopicPhenomenology and Existential Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsSign (mathematics)PhilosophyGermanEncyclopediaEpistemologyField (mathematics)Sign systemSemioticsLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sign studies are traditionally divided into two major traditions: Peircean and Saussurean. However, other thinkers theorized the sign in radically unique terms. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) is one of these parallel thinkers. Rather than considering the sign in exclusively logical or linguistic terms, Heidegger claimed that the sign grounded existence itself. The sign was at the very heart of being. Strangely, Heidegger's contribution to sign studies is, on the whole, disregarded. With this paper I will explain Heidegger's conception of the sign, in hope that this will broaden our field's theoretical encyclopaedia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.012

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.286 · 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