Exploring the role of lexis and grammar for the stable identification of register in an unrestricted corpus of web documents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
of the documents, as register-whether a text is, e.g., a news article or a recipe-is arguably the most important predictor of linguistic variation (see Biber in Corpus Linguist Linguist Theory 8:9-37, 2012). Despite having received significant attention in recent years, the modeling of online registers has faced a number of challenges, and previous studies have presented contradictory results. In particular, these have concerned (1) the extent to which registers can be automatically identified in a large, unrestricted corpus of web documents and (2) the stability of the models, specifically the kinds of linguistic features that achieve the best performance while reflecting the registers instead of corpus idiosyncrasies. Furthermore, although the linguistic properties of registers vary importantly in a number of ways that may affect their modeling, this variation is often bypassed. In this article, we tackle these issues. We model online registers in the largest available corpus of online registers, the Corpus of Online Registers of English (CORE). Additionally, we evaluate the stability of the models towards corpus idiosyncrasies, analyze the role of different linguistic features in them, and examine how individual registers differ in these two aspects. We show that (1) competitive classification performance on a large-scale, unrestricted corpus can be achieved through a combination of lexico-grammatical features, (2) the inclusion of grammatical information improves the stability of the model, whereas many of the previously best-performing feature sets are less stable, and that (3) registers can be placed in a continuum based on the discriminative importance of lexis and grammar. These register-specific characteristics can explain the variation observed in previous studies concerning the automatic identification of online registers and the importance of different linguistic features for them. Thus, our results offer explanations for the jungle-likeness of online data and provide essential information on online registers for all studies using online data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".