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

Action, program, metaphor

2020· article· en· W3089467983 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

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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