MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548558551 · doi:10.1017/s0261444816000100

Developing illustrative descriptors of aspects of mediation for the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)

2016· article· en· W2548558551 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Teaching · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMediationVariety (cybernetics)Process (computing)EpistemologyObject (grammar)Reflection (computer programming)Meaning (existential)Focus (optics)Space (punctuation)PsychologyComputer scienceSociologyCognitive scienceLinguisticsArtificial intelligenceSocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion of mediation has been the object of growing interest in second language education in recent years. The increasing awareness of the complex nature of the process of learning – and teaching – stretches our collective reflection towards less explored areas. In mediation, the immediate focus is on the role of language in processes like creating the space and conditions for communication and/or learning, constructing and co-constructing new meaning, and/or passing on information, whilst simplifying, elaborating, illustrating or otherwise adapting input in order to facilitate the process concerned. At a deeper level though, the notion of mediation embraces a broader spectrum of dimensions and connotations. Mediation has been defined as a ‘nomadic notion’ (Lenoir 1996) insomuch as it is at the core of a variety of scientific disciplines and the term ‘mediation’ is used in different senses in different contexts.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.238 · 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