MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289546313 · doi:10.33896/porj.2022.4.7

Wyrażenie młode wilki we współczesnym języku polskim

2022· article· en· W4289546313 on OpenAlex
Dorota Połowniak-Wawrzonek

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

VenuePoradnik Językowy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and Culture
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdeMeaning (existential)Expression (computer science)Stereotype (UML)PhilosophyLiteratureArtPsychologyEpistemologyComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idiom młode wilki (young wolves), with an additional meaning ‘young, entrepreneurial, go-getting people, who climb the career ladder fast, are extremely successful in a given fi eld’ exists in the contemporary Polish language. The meaning of this expression reveals the following semes that are signifi cant for the stereotype of wolf: ‘predacious’, ‘aggressive’, ‘hostile’, ‘distrustful’, ‘wild’, ‘dangerous for a human being’. Such a meaning of this idiom has been established under the infl uence of a fi lm directed by J. Żamojda and the song titled Obława (Hunt) by Jacek Kaczmarski although the impact of the fi lm seems to be predominant here. In the contemporary Polish texts, the expression młode wilki can be found in both standard and modifi ed forms: these are usually innovations with additions, cf. e.g. młode wilki polskiego kina (young wolves of the Polish cinematography), młode wilki obozu władzy (young wolves of the ruling camp), and młode wilki biznesu (young wolves of business).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.280 · 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