MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205506708 · doi:10.3765/salt.v31i0.5085

Modality in the nominal domain: Yalnhej DPs in Chuj

2022· article· en· W4205506708 on OpenAlexaff
Luis Alonso‐Ovalle, Justin Royer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModalModality (human–computer interaction)Quantifier (linguistics)LinguisticsDomain (mathematical analysis)ExistentialismModal verbVariable (mathematics)MathematicsComputer sciencePosition (finance)Natural language processingArtificial intelligencePhilosophyEpistemologyMathematical analysisEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How do modal expressions determine which possibilities they invoke? Do they do it the same way across categories? Recent work proposes that modal auxiliaries project the domain of possibilities that they quantify over from an event variable, which can get different values in different syntactic positions (Hacquard 2006, 2009, 2010, see also Kratzer 2013). Based on the behaviour of the Spanish random choice indefinite uno cualquiera, Alonso-Ovalle & Menéndez-Benito (2018) conclude that the same strategy is available for modal indefinites. This paper brings evidence from Chuj, an understudied Mayan language, which supports this conclusion further. The paper focuses on yalnhej DPs, a type of quantifier that makes a non-upper bound existential claim and that contributes a modal component with a flavour that depends on syntactic position.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings from Semantics and Linguistic TheorySame topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207