MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2908242929 · doi:10.5539/mas.v13n2p1

Requirements for the Terminology Definition in the Arabic Lexicons of Critique and Eloquence

2019· article· en· W2908242929 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qutaiba Habashneh, Abbas Abbas, Ibrahim Hassan Al Rababah

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLexicography and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpression (computer science)TerminologyCLARITYMeaning (existential)Status quoSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceLinguisticsArabicEpistemologyNatural language processingLawPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowing the status of defining expressions requires the knowledge of the conditions that must occur in this definition to have a full meaning, leading to its original purpose, which also leads to a general agreement about this definition among specialists.  The status quo of expressions in dictionaries requires recognition of a set of conditions that govern the definition of an expression in a dictionary a govern the expression itself (connoted and denoted). This study has established some basic conditions. For example, the definition should connote the essence of the item, its gender, division and be equal to the thing it defines. The search for conditions of definition is indeed a search to achieve three purposes: giving the expression its position in the structure of knowledge, agreeing on the specific meaning of the expression, and enabling non-specialists to somehow understand the expression. The research concludes that the general conditions that characterize the definition of expression are clarity, accuracy, and completion.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicLexicography and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207