MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089467983 · doi:10.1080/03080188.2020.1795803

Action, program, metaphor

2020· article· en· W3089467983 on OpenAlexaff
Denis M. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueInterdisciplinary Science Reviews · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsMetaphorEpistemologyAgency (philosophy)Action (physics)MetaphysicsMeaning (existential)Cognitive scienceNatural (archaeology)Control (management)SociologyPhilosophyPsychologyComputer scienceBiologyLinguisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metaphor is indispensable to science. Evelyn Fox Keller has argued argue that there is a commonality between the metaphors of gene action, and that of a genetic program. I suggest that the common thread is that of executive control or agency. The genetic program metaphor has progressively undergone a process that William James called ‘vicious abstractionism’, in which an abstract concept is erroneously made concrete; the metaphorical conceit has become metaphysical commitment. I use a natural meaning approach to illocutionary force to ask whether genes really are programs, whether they issue commands to the developmental systems. I argue that it is more plausible to suppose that developmental systems issue commands to genes. Agency or executive control more properly lies with the organism.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.044
Scholarly communication0.0060.014
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterdisciplinary Science ReviewsSame topicChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207