MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493004626 · doi:10.51291/2377-7478.1108

The grounds for animal subjectivity and intersubjectivity

2016· article· en· W2493004626 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy P. Racine

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Sentience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersubjectivitySentienceSubjectivityPerspective (graphical)Argument (complex analysis)EpistemologyRelation (database)PsychologyAnimal ethicsCognitive sciencePhilosophyEnvironmental ethics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Harnad (2016) presents an engaging and persuasive argument that stakes out the aims and domain of the fledgling journal, Animal Sentience. As an inaugural editorial, it does this job masterfully, but it does so from a perspective that tends to treat mental states in an overly general manner and that makes hard distinctions between mental and behavioral phenomena. I argue that when it comes to animal minds, it might be more helpful to think of mental concepts in a more piecemeal way that also retains the intrinsic relation between mind 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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.312 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal SentienceSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207