MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2489852031 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511845352.009

Cognitive models, inferencing and affect

2010· book-chapter· en· W2489852031 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica de Villiers

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)CognitionPsychologyComputer scienceCognitive psychologyCognitive scienceNeuroscienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter outlines approaches to top-down cognitive modelling and inferencing, and addresses functionally grounded work on affect. We describe each area and illustrate its potential for addressing questions in clinical discourse analysis. We also review recent work from neuroimaging and lesion studies to suggest some of the relevant neural systems. As usual, we draw on various disciplinary perspectives and theoretical models. Our practical motivation here is to use what works, and has potential for coding corpora in the various linguistic contexts and situations encountered doing clinical discourse analysis.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.977
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicCognitive Science and MappingFrench-language works237,207