MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376458592 · doi:10.7202/1098866ar

The Semiotics of Development: Towards the Economics of Path Dependence

2023· article· en· W4376458592 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luí­s Otávio Bau Macedo

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sémiotiques · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Realism in Sociology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemioticsSemiosisEpistemologyCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Schema (genetic algorithms)SociologyPerformative utteranceSocial semioticsCognitive scienceComputer sciencePsychologyPhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development is a concept whose ontological foundations are include phenomena, such as technologies, institutions, and cultural traits that embody the determinants of development differentials. This contribution argues that semiotics is the science to study these complex phenomena of development. Its approach is based on Charles Sanders Peirce’s semiotics and John Searle’s analysis of social reality. Development trajectories are depicted as specific compounds of institutions (signs), technologies (objects), and markets (interpretants) that create meaningful properties depending on symbolic forms. Development is a socially structured and observer-relative phenomenon. Developmental semiosis depends upon symbolic powers that structure and assemble collective intentionality. The paper advances two critical conditions essential to development. The first is semiotic intra-coherence, which is related with the bridging of dispositional functions in a coordinated way in networks of artifacts and users. The second is inter-coherence. It takes place as the supervenient causality of social structures and the performative character of habitual patterns of behavior. Both are intertwined in syntactic and semantic forms evolving in time by forging the development of path-dependent trajectories.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sémiotiquesSame topicCritical Realism in SociologyFrench-language works237,207