MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324107265 · doi:10.16995/dscn.9665

Zesting Up Stylometry with MapLemon: A Corpus for Stylometric Demographic Identification

2023· article· fr· W4324107265 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Theodore Daniel Manning, Eugenia Lukin, Patrick Juola, R. Klein

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Studies / Le champ numérique · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicAuthorship Attribution and Profiling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesCorpus linguisticsStyle (visual arts)ArtLinguisticsHistoryLiteraturePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MapLemon is a corpus in its second iteration that was created to obtain a baseline corpus for linguistic variation among English-speaking North Americans. The MapLemon corpus currently houses upwards of 21,000 words across 185 participants, 10+ linguistic backgrounds, and 40+ US states and Canadian provinces. MapLemon also houses writing from 91 transgender and non-binary individuals. MapLemon presents a unique method for data collection in the virtual written medium and a corpus that has proven useful for identifying demographic information via writing style, otherwise known as stylometry.MapLemon est un corpus en sa deuxième itération qui a été créé pour obtenir un corpus de référence des variations linguistiques parmi les anglophones d'Amérique du Nord. Le corpus MapLemon contient actuellement plus de 21 000 mots provenant de 185 participants de plus de 10 origines linguistiques et de plus de 40 États américains et provinces canadiennes. MapLemon contient également les écrits de 91 personnes transgenres et non binaires. MapLemon présente une méthode unique de collecte de données dans le domaine de l'écriture virtuelle et un corpus qui s'est avéré utile pour identifier des informations démographiques par le biais du style d'écriture, également connu sous le nom de stylométrie.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Studies / Le champ numériqueSame topicAuthorship Attribution and ProfilingFrench-language works237,207