MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763786027 · doi:10.32473/sal.v30i2.107359

Tout ton flottant bas autorise-t-il la propogation du ton haut precedent en Dagara-Wule.pdf

2001· article· en· W2763786027 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

VenueStudies in African Linguistics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTonTone (literature)LinguisticsHumanitiesHistoryPhysicsArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study addresses the syntactic implications of low floating tones in Wule, one of the three varieties of Dagara, a language of the Voltai'c Group spoken in the northern part of Ghana and the southern part of Burkina Faso, The data show that if "peripheral" low floating tones allow a high preceding tone to spread, it is the other way around for "internal" low floating tones, In fact, the latter type of tones, like opaque consonants, always prevents a high preceding tone from spreading, This result leads to a question concerning the relationship between internal low floating tones and opaque consonants, After debating two different assumptions, it has been retained that, despite the similar syntactic implications, internal low floating tones and opaque consonants are two different linguistic entities which do not have, as such, any historical link.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.345 · 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