MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234060552 · doi:10.1093/llc/fqn007

Introduction

2007· article· en· W4234060552 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLiterary and Linguistic Computing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypertextNarrativeStylisticsHumanismDigital humanitiesLibrary scienceComputer scienceDigital scholarshipJoint (building)LinguisticsWorld Wide WebPolitical sciencePhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital Humanities (DH) 2006 was the first conference hosted by the newly constituted Association of Digital Humanities Organizations (ADHO). It represents a continuation of the ALLC and ACH joint conferences, and this continuation can be seen in the topics discussed in the various papers, panels and posters. In February 1989 readers of the Humanist Mailing List, then into its second year, and then as now edited by Willard McCarty, could read the following list of topics that would be presented in the first joint ACH/ALLC conference in Toronto later that year, which included: archaeology; lexical databases; authorship attribution; manuscript bibliographies; computational linguistics; music; humanistic research; national research funding; computer-assisted learning; content analysis; narrative analysis; databases; scanning; discourse analysis; stylistics; editorial problems; text archives; the French novel; funding issues; text encoding; hypertext.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.208 · 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