MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108979712 · doi:10.1075/ftl.10.02kat

Producing metaphor (and other forms of non-literal language) in the laboratory

2020· book-chapter· en· W3108979712 on OpenAlexaff
Albert N. Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueFigurative thought and language · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphorLiteral (mathematical logic)LinguisticsLiteral and figurative languageComputer scienceCommunicationPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this chapter I argue for the utility of studying nonliteral language production in the laboratory. Three aspects of nonliteral language production were provided as examples: first, inducing non-literal language in interactive communication (and identifying features of the produced language); second, using production techniques to identify the discourse context in which nonliteral language emerges and, finally, examining how production techniques can inform about the basic cognitive mechanisms that underlie metaphor usage.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigurative thought and languageSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207