MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133032245

Topics in the Semantics of Colour Language

2025· dissertation· W7133032245 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

VenueTSpace · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicCategorization, perception, and language
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMirroringPhenomenology (philosophy)Meaning (existential)Relation (database)Semantics (computer science)Space (punctuation)Object (grammar)Iconicity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colour experiences are systematically related by phenomenal relativesimilarity, inclusion, and exclusion. Colour spaces model these experiences and relations. This dissertation argues that colour spaces are useful tools for modelling colour language meaning, especially with sensitivity to its metaphysical and epistemological dimensions. Knowledge of colour language involves associations among colour experiences, colour expressions, and colour properties. This includes associations between phenomenal relations among colour experiences and mirroring relations among the properties they represent. Colour spaces help model this knowledge. Chapter 1 ‘Colour Space Semantics’ argues that colour spaces also have another benefit. Facts about colour language meaning depend on facts about colour and colour spaces encode this dependence in our theory of meaning while simultaneously making possible a high degree of ii circumspection when theorizing about linguistic issues whose resolution depends on contentious theoretical questions about colour. One such question concerns the relation between phenomenology and representational content. If phenomenology and representational content “come apart” , different representational contents are possible for colour experiences of the same type, yielding different possible interpretations for colour expressions associated with it. As Chapter 2 ‘Languages and Colour Language’ argues, a certain independently appealing theory of colour forces us to consider what not only the meanings of colour expressions must be like, but also the languages they belong to. Colour spaces are crucial to the background theory that informs our analysis of colour language semantics. As Chapter 3 ‘Analyticity and Colour Language’ demonstrates, there may also be a role for them in the semantics. It argues that representing exclusion relations between colour properties in colour language meanings overcomes the standard objection that putatively analytic colour sentences resist analysis as such and supports following Russell (2008) in theorizing analyticity as a property that sentences have in virtue of their reference determiners, not their characters or truth conditions.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.377 · 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