Prevalence of Prefabricated Structures in Academic Discourse: A Corpus-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiword structures that appear in a text more than expected frequency are called lexical bundles. These prefabricated structures vary in length but the most common lexical bundles are four-word lexical bundles which have been explored by many scholars worldwide. The current study aimed to explore five-word lexical bundles, which have lesser been researched. For this purpose a corpus of about 4.7 million words was compiled which consists of PhD dissertations written in Pakistani context. Moreover, the dissertations were selected from three different disciplines to make the study cross disciplinary. The corpus was analyzed according to the taxonomy of lexical bundles given by Biber et al. (1999). The analysis shows that lexical bundles are predominant feature of PhD dissertations in Pakistani context. Moreover, frequency of lexical bundles varies from discipline to discipline, and the structural variation of lexical bundles is also found across disciplines. Dominant structures across disciplines are not fixed as Prepositional Phrase Fragments is the dominant category in the corpus of English Studies and corpus of Social Sciences, whereas, Verb Phrase Fragments is the dominant category in the corpus of Bio Sciences.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.025 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".