MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390642104 · doi:10.4000/revuehn.3836

Calculer la sémantique avec le langage IEML

2023· article· fr· W4390642104 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Lévy

Bibliographic record

VenueHumanités numériques · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article présente IEML (Information Economy MetaLanguage), un système de représentation uniforme de la signification et de la connaissance humaine qui peut être lu et traité automatiquement par les machines. Distinguée des sémantiques pragmatique et référentielle, la sémantique linguistique est aujourd’hui formalisée de manière incomplète. Seule sa dimension syntagmatique a été mathématisée sous la forme des langages réguliers. Il restait à formaliser sa dimension paradigmatique. Pour résoudre le problème de la mathématisation complète du langage, y compris sa dimension paradigmatique, je propose de coder le sens linguistique en IEML. IEML a la même capacité expressive qu’une langue naturelle et possède une structure algébrique permettant le calcul de sa sémantique. L’article explique son dictionnaire, sa grammaire formelle et ses outils intégrés de construction de graphes sémantiques. Au titre de ses applications, IEML pourrait être le vecteur d’un calcul et d’une communication fluide du sens – l’interopérabilité sémantique – capable de décloisonner la mémoire numérique et de nourrir les progrès de l’intelligence collective, de l’intelligence artificielle et des humanités numériques. Je conclus en indiquant quelques directions de recherche. Ce texte présente la synthèse de plusieurs décennies de recherches.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.290
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.049 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumanités numériquesSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207