MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250344253 · doi:10.1075/bct.87.07tab

Loving and hating the movies in English, German and Spanish

2016· book-chapter· en· W4250344253 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBenjamins current topics · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgumentativeGermanStyle (visual arts)LinguisticsSociocultural evolutionPsychologyGraduation (instrument)Polarity (international relations)White (mutation)SociologyLiteratureArtMathematicsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a quantitative analysis of evaluative language in a genre in which it is particularly prominent, that of movie reviews. The data chosen are non-professional consumer-generated reviews written in English, German and Spanish. The reviews are analysed in terms of the categories of Attitude and Graduation within the Appraisal framework (Martin and White, 2005). A number of similarities in the distribution of the Appraisal subcategories were found across the three languages, such as the high frequency of Appreciation and the narrow relationship between the global polarity of the reviews and the individual polarity of the spans. More importantly, the analysis uncovers a number of cross-linguistic distributional differences, which may be explained in terms of a wide array of factors, such as lexicogrammar, word order, argumentative style or sociocultural reasons.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.241 · 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