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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Central to the investigation of the biological and cognitive capacities underlying human language is to determine how hypothetically distinct linguistic and non-linguistic computational systems interact to yield the representation of the meaning of a sentence. The focus of our chapter is on the comprehension of “indeterminate” sentences, that is, sentences seemingly semantically incomplete – albeit grammatical – such as “The man began the book”. While one might understand such a sentence as referring to an event that the man began doing with the book, the actual event cannot be determined. We contend that the interpretation of indeterminate sentences relies on the identification of structurally determined gaps which function to signal higher, non-linguistic cognitive mechanisms to trigger pragmatic inferences. These inferences serve to enrich the output of the linguistic system to give the sentence a meaning fitting with a particular context. Psycholinguistic and neuroimaging (fMRI) data are discussed supporting the view that the source of sentence enrichment is pragmatic – not analytic lexical-semantic decompositions – beyond linguistic computations per se.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it