MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998696602 · doi:10.3765/salt.v29i0.4636

Neutralizing Free Choice Items via Maximal Domain Restriction: Farsi -i Indefinites

2019· article· en· W2998696602 on OpenAlexaff
Luis Alonso‐Ovalle, Esmail Moghiseh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Near East History
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssertionParallelsInterpretation (philosophy)MathematicsDomain (mathematical analysis)Computer scienceNatural language processingLinguisticsArtificial intelligencePhilosophyEconomicsProgramming languageMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper identifies two types of free choice items (FCIs) in Farsi: yek-i DPs and har -i DPs. Their distribution and interpretation pose a puzzle: yek -i DPs pattern with other existential FCIs, and har -i DPs with other universal FCIs, but both items lose their prototypical FCI behavior when they combine with the accusative marker -ro. The paper shows that the loss of FCI behavior follows from an alternative-based analysis of FCIs (Chierchia 2013) under some assumptions about the semantic effect of -ro. The analysis parallels the explanation for the loss of FCI status of Spanish algunos presented in Alonso-Ovalle & Menéndez-Benito 2011 in that it also relies on the derivation of alternatives that are equivalent to the assertion, hence not excludable.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings from Semantics and Linguistic TheorySame topicAncient Near East HistoryFrench-language works237,207