MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605896472 · doi:10.37693/pjos.2016.7.16454

“The whole is greater than the sum of its parts” - True, false or meaningless?

2017· article· en· W2605896472 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Esa Itkonen

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Journal of Semiotics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
Topiclinguistics and terminology studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSloganContext (archaeology)Meaning (existential)Relation (database)Value (mathematics)Contrast (vision)LinguisticsMathematicsComputer scienceEpistemologyPhilosophyStatisticsArtificial intelligenceHistoryData miningPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The slogan in the title of this article is meaningless in a context where the notion of “sum” does not apply. It is false in a context where the whole is equal to (or indistinguishable from) the sum of its parts. Having only a metaphorical meaning, it is neither clearly true nor clearly false in a context where no numerical value can be assigned to this relation of magnitude (which is typically the case in linguistics). In this article, however, a unit of measurement is devised which makes it possible to decide whether a linguistic whole is greater or smaller than the sum of its parts. In the former case the slogan is true whereas in the latter case it is, once again, false.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Journal of SemioticsSame topiclinguistics and terminology studiesFrench-language works237,207