MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212891059 · doi:10.1075/cilt.360

Points of Convergence in Romance Linguistics

2022· book· en· W4212891059 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science. Series 4, Current issues in linguistic theory · 2022
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval European Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomance languagesCatalanRomancePortugueseLinguisticsSyntaxPhonologyHistorical linguisticsRomanianBridging (networking)HistoryVariety (cybernetics)ArtLiteraturePhilosophyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This volume brings together selected papers from the 48th annual Linguistics Symposium on Romance Languages, held at York University in Toronto, Canada, in April 2018. It presents original research on a wide variety of Romance languages both past (Latin, Old Catalan, Old Iberian Romance, Old Spanish, Old Portuguese, and West-Iberian Medieval Latin) and present (Brazilian Portuguese, Catalan, French, Picard, Portuguese, Romanian, and Spanish) along with a number of contemporary dialects, including Basque Country Spanish, Dominican Spanish, Maine French, Neapolitan, and Picardie French. Divided into four sections — Interfaces, Bridging issues at the CP-TP-vP levels, Bridging issues at the PP-DP levels, and Bridging issues in linguistics — the volume gives researchers and advanced students access to contemporary issues and novel ideas bridging across various areas of Romance linguistics (e.g., morphology, syntax, semantics, phonology, sociolinguistics, first and second language acquisition).

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.017
Scholarly communication0.0110.014
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science. Series 4, Current issues in linguistic theorySame topicMedieval European Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207