MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016700105 · doi:10.1075/slsi.33.03tal

Mobilizing for the next relevant action

2020· book-chapter· en· W3016700105 on OpenAlexaff
Carmen Taleghani‐Nikazm, Veronika Drake, Andrea Golato, Emma Betz

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in language and social interaction · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Computer sciencePolitical sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter discusses three different actions speakers can employ to move between two concurrently ongoing activities, playing cards and talking. Specifically, we describe three turn formats that mobilize another participant to perform the next move in a card game: (1) turns including the discourse marker so , (2) imperatives, and (3) second-person declaratives. So -turns and imperative forms are used to resume a game put on hold, however, imperatives are only used if speakers have already shown an orientation to game resumption. In contrast, second-person declaratives are used in situations when one player is not oriented to the game but others are. In the discussion, we show that turn formats are sensitive to the multimodal context and participation framework of the interaction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.112 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in language and social interactionSame topicLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesFrench-language works237,207