Revisit Language Modeling Competition and Extinction: A Data-Driven Validation
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
Understanding language competition and extinction is an interdisciplinary challenge, and math models provide a tool for interpreting linguistic census data and possibly predict the language shift trend at the population scale. In this study, new data from previously examined areas were modeled, specifically Catalan and Spanish in Catalonia, Spanish and English in Houston, Texas, Dutch and French in Brussels, Euskera and Spanish in Spain and French and English in Canada. Three mathematical models of the language competition have been validated. The first is the Abrams-Strogatz model, which treats populations as having two monolingual groups. The second is the Castelló model, which considers bilingual speakers. The third is the Mira model, which considers language competition when the two languages have high similarities. It was found that the some of the data matched Abrams-Strogatz original model, but some divergences could still be addressed. It was also found that the Mira model needs some improvement in how it treats the differences between languages.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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