MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945646255 · doi:10.1515/css-2019-0012

Genuine Triadicity in Computation, Cognition and Consciousness

2019· article· en· W2945646255 on OpenAlex
David Lidov

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

VenueChinese Semiotic Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOrigins and Evolution of Life
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemiosisSemioticsConsciousnessEpistemologyBiosemioticsCognitive scienceSign (mathematics)Unconscious mindRelation (database)CognitionPhilosophyComputer sciencePsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Charles Peirce insisted that representation is a genuine three-part relation, irreducible to a complex of two-part relations. Demonstrations that two-part relations (like stimulus and response) can be described as three-part are chaff in the wind. Ironically, Peirce’s well-known description in semiotic language of sunflowers makes that error. Until recently, there was scant reason to speak of “sign” – in its full Peircean sense – in biology, computation, or even for unconscious thought. Current developments in computation and animal behavior suggest that triadic relations could be inherent in some classes of their operations, but this article does not find that possibility demonstrated. Instead, the argument is advanced that we should recognize a distinct theory of data (cybernetics) as adequate to describe the role of information in primitive lifeforms. Thus, we adopt definitions that do not support the proposal associated with (though not originating with) Thomas Sebeok, that life and semiosis are coextensive.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.291 · 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