Multiple Perspectives on Terminological Variation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present volume is to provide a present-day take on variation in terminology by looking forward and examining what leading scholars in the field are working on and where they are taking research in the field today.This reader is built around three themes arranged according to complementary points of view to stimulate thought on the subject of variation as it is approached today. The first theme, “The social dimension of variation”, includes three contributions dealing with variation across different categories of speakers. This reflects not only the expert/layperson dichotomy but also other more original polarities as the emotional dimension and the issue of diastratic variation across LSPs. The second part of this reader puts forward different tools and methods to identify, describe and manage term variation. The third theme of this reader questions semantics of term variation through the topics of concept saturation, multidimensionality and metaphor.Variation, through this picture of current studies, proves to be the touchstone for the understanding of the major issues of terminology research today. The included papers draw on research in terminology carried out in different language communities - Spanish, French, Portuguese, Italian and Dutch in particular - thereby opening up a window on much of the research carried out in these cultural areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it