Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noam Chomsky is closely associated with the eponymous Chomskyan Revolution, a dramatic shift of allegiances, interests, and methodologies in linguistics over the decade or so following his 1957 Syntactic Structures. But these events did not occur in isolation. The developments in linguistics, and Chomsky’s currents of influence more generally, were shaped by movements in other fields, chiefly mathematics, philosophy, and psychology; in turn, Chomsky’s picture of linguistics, and his arguments, shaped developments in those fields as they participated in another revolution, an umbrella revolution, the Cognitive Revolution. The Cognitive Revolution, also dated to the 1950s but still expanding today, grew largely out of artificial intelligence and psychology, dilating to include disciplines such as philosophy, anthropology, the neurosciences, literary criticism, and even several distinctly non-Chomskyan frameworks within linguistics. All histories of this revolution name Chomsky prominently among the founding figures, on the basis of the shared features between his approach to linguistics and the model of mind that anchored the revolution, and on the basis of his systematic dismissal of the psychological framework that cognitive revolutionaries forcefully rejected, behaviorism. This chapter charts the interpenetration of Chomskyan linguistics, Cognitive Psychology, and Artificial Intelligence, as the Cognitive Revolution took form. It pays particular attention to Chomsky’s collaborations with George Miller, another universally identified founding figure of the Cognitive Revolution whose work profoundly and directly shaped Cognitive Psycholinguistics; and to the consonance Chomsky’s model had with the algorithmic, information-processing, computational picture of mental life that was among the first principles of the Cognitive Revolution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".