MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406813726 · doi:10.3765/elm.3.5854

Pseudo-scoping out of tensed clauses: cumulation vs. buildups

2025· article· en· W4406813726 on OpenAlex
Jonathan Palucci

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueExperiments in Linguistic Meaning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tensed complement clauses are often assumed to be scope islands for quan- tifier raising (QR) of universal quantifiers. However, as observed by Farkas & Gi- annakidou 1996, Barker 2022, Hoeks et al. 2022, a.o., there are apparent counterex- amples to this assumption, where a universal DP appears to scope out of a tensed complement clause to take scope over a singular indefinite in the matrix clause, hence- forth ’variation readings’. Hoeks et al. 2022 propose that QR out of tensed clauses is possible, but only in event structural configurations which involve buildup processes. In this paper, we report experimental results providing evidence that variation readings are not sensitive to buildups. We then offer an alternative analysis, capturing variation readings as a form of cumulation, and we present experimental results supporting this analysis. The empirical generalization suggests that tensed complement clauses are islands for QR after all, and apparent counterexamples are due to other mechanisms.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.299 · 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