MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606080436 · doi:10.5539/ass.v13n5p153

Figure of Speech in Bandung Historical Tourism Sites Naming

2017· article· en· W2606080436 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Language Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirektorat Jenderal Pendidikan TinggiUniversitas Padjadjaran
KeywordsTourismLinguisticsFigure of speechMetaphorPart of speechLiteral and figurative languageHistoryGeographyPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many researchers do their research on figurative language or figure of speech, but it is limited research on figure of speech in historical tourism sites naming. The aim of this research is to investigate the figure of speech in historical tourism sites naming in Bandung area. The earlier study explained that the names of tourism destinations in Jawa Barat have different figure of speech and it happens to Bandung historical tourism sites naming. The method used by the present writers in this research is descriptive method. The descriptive method chosen by the present writers is used to identify and classify the names of the historical tourism sites in Bandung area as the data. From the various types of figure of speech referring to the theory, it is found that they are two types of figure of speech found in the data. The two figures of speech employed are personification (Gedung Merdeka and Gedung Indonesia Menggugat) and metaphor (Goa Belanda, Goa Jepang, Paris van Java, and Kota Kembang).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.248 · 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