MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2907416197 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v9n1p383

A Semantic Study of Dummy Subjects in Dickens’ Novel Hard Times

2018· article· en· W2907416197 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Policy, and Dickens Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)Context (archaeology)LinguisticsComputer scienceNatural language processingSemantic propertyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceEpistemologyPhilosophyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To be required for some grammatical properties, dummy elements have lost their lexical meaning. They have no sense of their own. However, such items have meaning in context. They play essential roles in the general semantic structure of sentences. This study attempts to confirm that dummy constructions can have some semantic meaning and there is no matter how abstract they are. It also highlights the functions of inserting these elements to satisfy the structural and semantic needs in Charles Dickens’ novel Hard Times.

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)0.079
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.079
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.314 · 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