MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337475735 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511780110.005

Pragmatics and pragmatism

2010· book-chapter· en· W2337475735 on OpenAlexaff
William Downes

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Linguistics and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPragmatismPragmaticsEpistemologyPhilosophyLinguisticsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The question for this chapter is what kind of rational warrant the mind/brain might have for believing mysteries, for that which it can never fully understand. In the tradition of Chomsky's linguistics and in conformity to how relevance theory conceives of itself, both linguistics and pragmatics are parts of cognitive psychology. However, in our accounts of semantic content, we are dependent on philosophy, on the manifest image. Psychological theories of representation are not extricable from philosophical analyses of key concepts. Conversely, both philosophical psychology and epistemology, to the degree they construct theories, should be consistent with the results of science, however distinct the method of inquiry. In fact, inextricability is obvious from the histories of both behaviourism and cognitive science.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical Linguistics and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207