MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398139763 · doi:10.1515/cogsem-2024-2003

The cultural semiotics of <i>Jingshen</i> and cognitive homeostasis

2024· article· en· W4398139763 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCognitive Semiotics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemioticsCognitionMeaning (existential)SociologyCreativityEpistemologyPsychologyPerspective (graphical)SemiosisCognitive scienceCognitive psychologySocial psychologyPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sonesson’s vision of the diversity of meaning-generation coincides well with the purview of the cultural semiotics of Jingshen , in which semiotic inquiry is envisioned to improve mental capacity, the expansion of mental/cognitive space, and ultimately the liberation of human thinking. When embracing new epistemologies for cognitive semiotics, semiotic inquiry can work well as a form of art of thinking that has the potential to maintain “cognitive homeostasis”, the tendency towards a relatively stable equilibrium that can be maintained in the holistic flux of mind, vitality, and creativity. A plausible path to this equilibrium is through a balance between the left and right hemispheres, between analytical thinking and synthetic thinking. In this sense, what we are facing is essentially a problem of “ecology of cognition” or “ecological cognition”, that is, viewing cognition from an ecological perspective or considering cognition as a form of ecological activity. The focus of cognitive semiotics nowadays must transcend not only words or other external symbols, but even the traditional sense of “humanity” needs to be reconsidered.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.310 · 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