MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7023392919

Language

2017· article· en· W7023392919 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIUScholarWorks (Indiana University) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVernacularPopulationStandard languageLanguage familyHindiConstructed languageEast Asian languagesOn Language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Language is the most human of all human abilities.It may be the defining characteristic of Homo sapiens.Wherever humans exist, language exists.Although no one knows the precise number of languages in the world, something in the order of 6,000 to 6,600 is a good estimate, the exact number depending on one's definition of language versus dialect.(For the layman, the term 'dialect' often connotes a substandard deformation of a standard language or, sometimes, an unwritten language spoken by a small tribal group.As a technical linguistic term, 'dialect' simply refers to any socially or geographically recognizable variant of a language, e.g.Standard American English, Oxbridge English, Australian English, Indian English, Appalachian English, cockney and black vernacular English are all 'dialects of English'.)Considering that the world is populated by billions of people, the number of distinct languages is actually rather small.In addition, a large portion of the world's population speaks only a small handful of these thousands of languages: Chinese (Mandarin), English, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, Arabic, Hindi and Indonesian/Malay count among the extra-large languages with hundreds of millions of speakers.English can rightfully be considered the world's most widespread language, especially when one takes into account second-language users, but it is not the language with the most speakers.Mandarin Chinese, with close to a billion speakers, can claim this first spot.Although some 6,000+ distinct languages exist, most of them can be grouped into families of related languages in the same way that different plants and animals can be grouped into species, genera and families.There are a few isolates, such as Basque and Hadza (Tanzania), but these are rare.Better-known families are Indo-European, to which English belongs, Sino-Tibetan (East Asia), Athabaskan (North America) and Niger-Congo (Africa south of the Sahara).Lower-level families such as Bantu and Semitic are easily recognizable whereas historically much deeper and larger superfamilies such as Nostratic (Europe, Northern Asia, the Caucasus and the Middle East) and Amerind (almost all native languages of the New world from southern Canada to Patagonia) are more tenuous groupings that are subject to ongoing debate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2800.216

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIUScholarWorks (Indiana University)Same topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207