MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366707325 · doi:10.1515/lass-2018-040301

Embodiment and Disembodiment in General Semiotics

2018· article· en· W4366707325 on OpenAlex
David Lidov

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

VenueLanguage and Semiotic Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and cultural evolution
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemioticsAestheticsVisual semioticsSociologyCommunicationEpistemologyVisual artsArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embodiment studies, strong after decades, remain a fount of vitality for semiotics. We connect sophisticated representations to prior experiences of sensing and manipulating our physical bodies, but we sometimes neglect the complementary moment of letting the body go. General semiotics (and/or general semiology), the encompassing framework such as Saussure imagined or Peirce proposed, has not yet theorized embodiment and disembodiment as universal and reciprocal. Semiotics needs to rediscover corporeality only because semiosis accomplished so much by disengaging from and erasing the body, often via play, games and abstraction, an advancement quintessentially human though perhaps not uniquely so.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.334 · 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