MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W68857114 · doi:10.13140/2.1.4075.3927

What can Verbs and Adjectives Tell us about Terms ?

2002· article· en· W68857114 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
Topiclinguistics and terminology studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyntagmatic analysisNounComputer scienceLinguisticsNatural language processingMeaning (existential)Artificial intelligenceNoun phrasePsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corpus processing tools are now an integral part of the compiling of specialized dictionaries and updating of term banks. They have led terminographers to consider terminological data differently, since many regularities and problems are highlighted in a more systematic manner. One linguistic fact more immediately revealed by the use of corpus tools is the relationship between terms in noun form with verbs and adjectives. In this paper, we study two specific types of relationships, namely morphological and syntagmatic relationships. We propose to consider lexical units that have one of these relationships with terms in nominal form. We will demonstrate that verbs and adjectives should be taken into account by terminographers for a number a reasons: some of them provide clues to the meaning of terms, others are morphologically and semantically related to terms in noun form.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topiclinguistics and terminology studiesFrench-language works237,207