MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210588137 · doi:10.1075/la.138

Syntax within the Word

2009· book· en· W4210588137 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Siddiqi

Bibliographic record

VenueLinguistik aktuell · 2009
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyntaxLinguisticsComputer scienceVerbPhraseWord (group theory)Blocking (statistics)Argument (complex analysis)Constraint (computer-aided design)Optimality theorySyntactic structureFeature (linguistics)Natural language processingArtificial intelligencePhilosophyMathematicsPhonology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Syntax within the Word provides a multifaceted look into the syntactic framework of Distributed Morphology (DM) within the Minimalist program. For those unfamiliar with the theory, this monograph provides an overview of DM and argues its strengths. For those more familiar with DM, this monograph provides analyses of familiar data much of which has not been treated within the framework: argument selection, stem allomorphy and suppletion, nominal compounds in English ( feet-first vs. *heads-first ), and the structure of the verb phrase. This monograph also proposes a future for the theory in the form of revisions to DM including: the elimination of readjustment rules, a new economy constraint (Minimize Exponence) that triggers fusion of functional heads, and a feature blocking system.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.005

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations59
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinguistik aktuellSame topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207