MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097281663

Status: Member Body Contribution

2010· article· en· W7097281663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and language evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin squareLatin AmericansCapital (architecture)Sequence (biology)Position (finance)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Request. This document asks for the disunification of a new *U+0242 LATIN SMALL LETTER GLOTTAL STOP from the existing U+0294 LATIN LETTER GLOTTAL STOP. It also asks for the deletion of the casepair relationship between U+0294 and U+0241 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER GLOTTAL STOP, and the addition of the case-pair relationship between U+0241 and the new *U+0242. (The asterisk is used to show that this character is not yet encoded.) If this proposal is adopted, the following three characters would exist: ¥ 0294 LATIN LETTER GLOTTAL STOP • caseless use in IPA and other phonetic notation (technical notation) • caseless use in Nootka, Nitinaht, Musqueam, Kootenai, Thompson (Canadian aboriginal orthographies) • does not have an uppercase equivalent x 0241 latin capital letter glottal stop x 0242 latin small letter glottal stop x 0C20 modifier letter glottal stop ∂ 0241 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER GLOTTAL STOP • casing use in Chipewyan, Dogrib, Slavey (Canadian aboriginal orthographies) • uppercase is 0242 latin small letter glottal stop x 0294 latin letter glottal stop x 0C20 modifier letter glottal stop ∑ 0242 LATIN SMALL LETTER GLOTTAL STOP • casing use in Chipewyan, Dogrib, Slavey (Canadian aboriginal orthographies) • uppercase is 0241 latin capital letter glottal stop x 0294 latin letter glottal stop x 0C20 modifier letter glottal stop with the following properties (including a change from Ll to Lo for U+0294):

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 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 score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

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)0.0260.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLinguistics and language evolutionFrench-language works237,207