MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028184996 · doi:10.1080/13875868.2020.1754832

Nearness as context-dependent expression: an integrative review of modeling, measurement and contextual properties

2020· article· en· W3028184996 on OpenAlex

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

VenueSpatial Cognition and Computation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsContextualizationContext (archaeology)Context analysisSpatial contextual awarenessComputer scienceExpression (computer science)Context effectFoundation (evidence)Context modelContextual designArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingData scienceMathematicsLinguisticsGeographyObject (grammar)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nearness expressions such as “near” are context-dependent spatial relations and are subject to the context variability effect. Depending on the provided context, “near” has a different semantic extension. We perform a literature review to identify the effect of context on “near”. To integrate the insights from different disciplines, we apply Turney’s contextualization framework which distinguishes between two types of features: primary and contextual. Primary features are the qualitative and quantitative distance measures and contextual features are the context factors used to determine a threshold on the nearness measurements. Additionally, we identify the appropriate features for different spatial tasks discussed in the literature. By doing so, we seek to build a foundation for a context-dependent model for “near”.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.206 · 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