MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7103228601

Work Smarter...Not Harder: Efficient Minimization of Dependency Length in SOV Languages

2024· article· en· W7103228601 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and cultural evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversität StuttgartAtomic Energy of Canada LimitedUniversität Potsdam
KeywordsHeuristicsDependency (UML)MinificationProperty (philosophy)Optimality theoryBounded functionVerbNatural language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dependency length minimization is a universally observed quantitative property of natural languages. However, the extent of dependency length minimization, and the cognitive mechanisms through which the language processor achieves this minimization remain unclear. This research offers mechanistic insights by postulating that moving a short preverbal constituent next to the main verb explains preverbal constituent ordering decisions better than global minimization of dependency length in SOV languages. This approach constitutes a least-effort strategy because it's just one operation but simultaneously reduces the length of all preverbal dependencies linked to the main verb. We corroborate this strategy using large-scale corpus evidence across all seven SOV languages that are prominently represented in the Universal Dependency Treebank. These findings align with the concept of bounded rationality, where decision-making is influenced by 'quick-yet-economical' heuristics rather than exhaustive searches for optimal solutions. Overall, this work sheds light on the role of bounded rationality in linguistic decision-making and language evolution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicLanguage and cultural evolutionFrench-language works237,207