MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243132701 · doi:10.1017/s0008413100002917

Abstracts/Résumés

2004· article· fr· W4243132701 on OpenAlexaff
Darin Howe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Content (measure theory)Cognitive linguisticsApplied linguisticsPsychologyLinguisticsComputer scienceMathematicsPhilosophyCognitionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimality Theory predicts that harmonic scales can be encoded in grammar in one of two ways: either as markedeness hierarchies or else as faithfulness hierarchies.Although most current researchers assume that harmony is encoded as markedness, many investigators have argued that some harmonic relations are better captured as faithfulness hierarchies that prevent the deletion or insertion of less harmonic elements.We demonstrate that at least two perceptually-motivated harmonic scales -notably relative vowel height as well as consonant glottalisation -need to be encoded in the grammar as faithfulness hierarchies which require that more harmonic elements, which are also more perceptible, are more faithfully adhered to.Our harmony-as-faithfulness analysis captures the fact that the same elements which undergo deletion also undergo insertion.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6520.602

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.192 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistiqueSame topicDiverse Scientific and Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207