MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2581834243 · doi:10.17759/chp.2015110310

Representation of Objective Situations in Preschool Children

2015· article· en· W2581834243 on OpenAlex
Nikolay Veraksa

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

VenueCultural-Historical Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology of Development and Education
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativeCategorizationRepresentation (politics)CognitionDialecticPsychologyCognitive psychologySign (mathematics)Subject (documents)MediationTransformation (genetics)Symbolic communicationOrientation (vector space)Computer scienceCognitive scienceArtificial intelligenceEpistemologyMathematicsSociologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper focuses on the types of representations of objective situations, that is, situations which are defined independently of the subject, by certain external perceptible circumstances and social expectations or rules. The author distinguishes between three types of objective situations in which children act: normative, developing and ambiguous. For each of these types there is a corresponding form of representation: sign, dialectical and symbolic. Each form is a product of the subject's cognitive activity, at the core of which lie cognitive abilities — a system of culturally specific means and ways of using them. The paper outlines normative and stabilizing abilities, transformation abilities, and symbolic mediation abilities. They help categorize different objects and features, enable transformation of situations and provide possibilities for orientation in ambiguous situations.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.118
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.304 · 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