MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184223283

Chaining and the formation of spatial semantic categories in childhood

2021· article· en· W3184223283 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Aotao Xu, Yang Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExtension (predicate logic)ChainingLexiconProcess (computing)CognitionComputer scienceLinguisticsCategorizationMeaning (existential)Cognitive scienceNatural language processingPsychologyArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children face the problem of extending a limited spatial lexicon to potentially infinite spatial situations. Previous work has examined how spatial semantic categories may be formed in child development, but it is unclear how children extend these categories to novel situations over the developmental time course. Drawing on cognitive linguistic theories of category extension, we present a framework that models the incremental extension of spatial relational words to novel situations through time. We describe a longitudinal dataset and computational analyses for investigating the extension of spatial word meanings in a developmental setting. Our preliminary results suggest that the formation of spatial categories takes place through an exemplar-based process of chaining, similar to the process underlying the growth of linguistic categories in history. Our work offers opportunities to explore the connection between ontogeny and phylogeny in the process of word meaning extension.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207