MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531088284 · doi:10.1515/lingty-2016-0006

Sampling for variety

2016· article· en· W2531088284 on OpenAlexaff
Matti Miestamo, Dik Bakker, Antti Arppe

Bibliographic record

VenueLinguistic Typology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Sampling (signal processing)Stratification (seeds)Representation (politics)Computer scienceDiversity (politics)GeographyArtificial intelligenceSociologyBiologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Variety sampling aims at capturing as much of the world’s linguistic variety as possible. The article discusses and compares two sampling methods designed for variety sampling: the Diversity Value method, in which sample languages are picked according to the diversity found in family trees, and the Genus-Macroarea method, in which genealogical stratification is primarily based on genera and areal stratification pays attention to the proportional representation of the genealogical diversity of macroareas. The pros and cons of the methods are discussed, some additional features are introduced to the Genus-Macroarea method, and the ability of both methods to capture crosslinguistic variety is tested with computerized simulations drawing on data in The world atlas of language structures database.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations93
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinguistic TypologySame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207