MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106209051 · doi:10.29173/cais1157

Memetic Relationships as Tillet’s Shared Characteristics

2020· article· en· W3106209051 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alex Mayhew

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesTaxonomy (biology)ArchetypeCatalogingSubject (documents)EthnologySociologyPhilosophyLibrary scienceComputer scienceArtLiteratureZoologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of knowledge organization, and cataloguing in particular, has increasingly become concerned with bibliographic relationships. Tillett (2001) developed a taxonomy of bibliographic relationships that is largely shared by Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), with the exception of the “shared characteristic” relationship including such features as shared creator or subject headings. This paper will offer another possible shared characteristic: “memes.” Memes are units of cultural inheritance and include literary tropes, character archetypes, and genre conceits, and can link otherwise unconnected works. Le domaine de l'organisation des connaissances, et du catalogage en particulier, se préoccupe de plus en plus des relations bibliographiques. Tillett (2001) a développé une taxonomie des relations bibliographiques qui est largement partagée par les Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), à l'exception de la relation «caractéristique partagée» incluant des caractéristiques telles que le partage de créateur ou de vedettes-matière. Cet article proposera une autre caractéristique commune possible: les mèmes. Les mèmes sont des unités d'héritage culturel qui comprennent des tropes et des archétypes de personnages et de genre, et qui peuvent lier des œuvres autrement non liées.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.016
Scholarly communication0.0110.021
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicDigital Communication and LanguageFrench-language works237,207