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
Computer corpus of Finnish telegraphese language (with English interlinears and translation).\n\nThe Finnish Telegraphese Corpus is a product of a cross-linguistic study of telegraphic language produced by normal adult subjects (university students) to describe a set of states of affairs. The responses were gathered in written questionnaire format, and the states of affairs to be described were held semantically identical across the languages studied. A selection of published studies of the project is listed below.\n\nTesak, Jürgen, Jussi Niemi & Päivi Koivuselkä-Sallinen: Telegraphese and ellipsis in German and Finnish: A comparison. In: C. Mair & M. Markus (eds.), New Departures in Contrastive Linguistics. Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft, Anglistische Reihe Band 5. Innsbruck 1992. Pp. 75-83. \nKoivuselkä-Sallinen, Päivi, Jussi Niemi & Jürgen Tesak (1993): Word Order in Simple Structures in Finnish and German. In: A. Crochetiere, J.-C. Boulanger & C. Ouellon (eds.), Actes du Xve Congres International des Linguistes, Quebec, Universite Laval, 9-14 aout 1992/Proceedings of the Xvth International Congress of Linguists, Quebec, Universite Laval, 9-14 August 1992. Sainte-Foy: PU Laval, 1993, Vol. III, pp. 489-492.\nTesak, Jürgen, Elisabeth Ahlsén, Gábor Györi, Päivi Koivuselkä-Sallinen, Jussi Niemi & Livia Tonelli: Patterns of ellipsis in telegraphese: A study of six languages. Folia Linguistica 24: 297-316 (1995).\nNiemi, Jussi, Jürgen Tesak & Päivi Koivuselkä-Sallinen: Telegraphic style and agrammatism in Finnish and German. In: L. Heltoft & H. Haberland (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics. Department of Language and Culture, Roskilde University (1996). Pp. 483 - 493.\nTesak, Jürgen & Jussi Niemi: Telegraphese and agrammatism: A cross-linguistic study. Aphasiology 11: 145-155 (1997).\n\nAbout 3000 word tokens in total, about 4 person months.\n\nlog\n25.11.2018 link http://islrn.org/resources/907-588-147-641-6 removed
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it