MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Features of Postpositions in Chulym Language

2017· article· en· W2782024675 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

VenueNauchnyi Dialog · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Canadian institutionsSAIT Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsComputer scienceNatural language processingCommunicationPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article considers several postpositions in Chulym as compared with other Turkic languages. It is noted that despite the fact that their functions have similarities with those of nominal cases, their functional scope is much wider. The author emphasizes that postpositions play an auxiliary role: they are used together with independent words to express grammatical meaning of case endings, and also help to establish semantic relations between lexical words in a sentence. It is shown that postpositions are able to express meanings of place, direction, instrument, reason, etc. It is noted that in traditional Turkic studies postpositions are recognized as uninflected words. The author’s study of postpositional constructions in Chulym language is presented. Special attention is paid to semantic derivation, by which the postposition is formed. Semantic and grammatical links of postpositions within the structure of phrases and sentences are demonstrated on examples of a number of postpositions ( шили, öжин, зäй, -бле etc.).

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)0.002
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 score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.239 · 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