How Information Complies With a Template: A Dual Mereological System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose an axiomatic ontological framework for both informational templates and the substantial informational entities (named “fillers”) that can comply with such templates. The mereological structure of a filler is provided by its slots, following seminal work by Bennett and the mereology of slots approach by Tarbouriech et al. Templates are composed of placeholders satisfying an extensional mereology. The parthood relation between placeholders is mirrored into the parthood between slots of the fillers compliant with those placeholders, where if a filler x complies with a placeholder a , the relation of mirroring is an isomorphism between a subset of slots of x and the template-parts of a . Some placeholders are mandatory and are mirrored into slots that need to be filled by a non-empty filler, whereas others are optional and are mirrored into slots that can be filled by an empty filler. We discuss mereological sum among placeholders and slots, order considerations, the distinction between empty fillers and empty concretizations (such as spaces or silences), the notion of semantic compliance and applications to clinical documents, relational databases and linguistics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".