phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | double dissociation of visual awareness in nonhuman primates— “We harnessed a well-established cross-over double dissociation between nonconscious and conscious processing, in which people perform in completely opposite ways when they are aware of stimuli versus when they are not.” | |
| claim-type | existence— “These results provide robust evidence for two distinct modes of processing in nonhuman primates.” | |
| method — evidence | — “In a series of seven experiments, we first established these signatures in humans using both known and newly developed nonverbal double-dissociation tasks and then identified similar signatures in rhesus monkeys ( Macaca mulatta).” | |
| object of study — evidence | — “To examine nonconscious influence in monkeys, we adopted a spatial-cueing paradigm ( 37 – 40 ).” | |
| research question — evidence | — “Since nonverbal species cannot report their internal states, philosophers and scientists have long debated whether the question of animal consciousness is empirically testable, and it still remains a topic of speculation ( 1 , 2 ).” | |
| contribution — evidence | — “Because this approach predicts that completely opposite signatures of performance would emerge only if there were both conscious and nonconscious processing modes, this framework can be used to reliably disentangle the two levels of processing in a nonhuman animal.” | |
| transfer | from human cognitive science / experimental consciousness research on humans: They take the cross-over double-dissociation marker of nonconscious processing, developed and validated only in verbal human subjects, and transplant it into nonhuman-primate comparative research as a nonverbal test for awareness— “Critically, by importing one of the strictest indicators of genuine nonconscious processing in human studies” | transfers[0] |
| transfer | from human cognitive science: the cross-over double dissociation of visual awareness, rebuilt as a nonverbal saccade task so that it can be run on a species that cannot be asked what it saw— “Much work in human cognitive science has shown that under certain circumstances, people display opposite behavioral signatures when they are consciously aware of stimuli (i.e., when they are exposed to clearly visible stimuli—supraliminal stimuli) versus when they are not aware (i.e., when they are exposed to stimuli that are flashed for a… | transfers[1] |
| mechanism | Subliminal cues capture gaze toward the cued (wrong) side and, without awareness, the subject cannot disengage before target onset, so the eyes are still at the wrong location when the target appears and the response is slowed— “subjects still failed to move their gaze to the target location ahead of time and maintained their gaze at the cue location during the final 100 ms prior to the target appearance” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | Conscious access to the cue lets the subject deploy a deliberate strategy that redirects gaze to the opposite location before the target appears, converting the same cue from interference into facilitation— “suggesting again that a conscious strategy was necessary in order for participants to redirect their gaze to the relevant location.” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | Because the two conditions push performance in opposite directions, the cross-over pattern itself is what separates aware from unaware processing in a nonverbal subject— “Since these opposite patterns of performance are predicted to emerge only if animals are aware in one condition (presenting functional facilitation) but unaware in the other (presenting persistent interference), they allow us to successfully disentangle the two types of processing in nonhuman species.” | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | a subliminal cue cannot be disengaged from, so it drags attention the wrong way; a supraliminal one can be reasoned about, so it helps - the two pull in opposite directions— “Researchers have argued that this phenomenon stems from the difficulty of disregarding a stimulus that is nonconsciously processed ( 33 , 34 ).” | mechanisms[3] |
| mechanism | the design's force comes from predicting the REVERSE of what salience alone would predict, so a confound cannot produce the result— “our predictions for implicating visual awareness and nonconscious processing are predicted in the reverse direction of what would typically be expected when inhibiting salient versus nonsalient incongruent stimuli” | mechanisms[4] |
| mechanism | only two processing modes can produce two opposite signatures, so the crossing itself is the inference - not either half of it— “Because this approach predicts that completely opposite signatures of performance would emerge only if there were both conscious and nonconscious processing modes, this framework can be used to reliably disentangle the two levels of processing in a nonhuman animal.” | mechanisms[5] |
| extends | the single-dissociation literature on animal awareness (blindsight analogues, implicit/explicit memory, binocular rivalry)— “All these important single dissociations of awareness exploration convincingly show that animals display properties similar to those seen in conscious or nonconscious processes.” | claim_relations[0] |
| contradicts | the position that consciousness requires language or a human-like theory of mind— “some advocate that consciousness may require complex processes like language, which is unique to adult humans ( 3 ) or a human-like theory of mind ( 4 )” | claim_relations[1] |
| builds-on | the spatial-cueing paradigm ( 37 - 40 )— “To examine nonconscious influence in monkeys, we adopted a spatial-cueing paradigm ( 37 – 40 ).” | claim_relations[2] |
| sense | awareness - the reportable kind, defined operationally by what a subject says it saw and by a forced-choice test at chance— “Participants’ performance did not differ from chance at the individual binomial level or at the group level” | senses[0] |
| sense | awareness - the behavioural kind, defined by a crossing of two opposite performance signatures and requiring no report at all— “Because this approach predicts that completely opposite signatures of performance would emerge only if there were both conscious and nonconscious processing modes, this framework can be used to reliably disentangle the two levels of processing in a nonhuman animal.” | senses[1] |
| sense | consciousness - the demanding sense requiring language or theory of mind, which would confine it to humans and a few great apes— “some advocate that consciousness may require complex processes like language, which is unique to adult humans ( 3 ) or a human-like theory of mind ( 4 )” | senses[2] |
| sense | consciousness - the neuroanatomical sense, on which birds and octopuses may qualify— “In contrast, based on neuroanatomical similarities, some argue that a number of species (including some birds and octopuses) are likely to be capable of generating conscious experience ( 7 ).” | senses[3] |
| control | two NONPREDICTIVE cues, presented in both the supraliminal and the subliminal conditions — held— “Thus, the participants in this control condition could not use the spatial cues to predict the target location” — rules out the mere presence of a cue as the explanation - if performance improved whenever any cue appeared, the effect would be arousal or alerting rather than the spatial information the cue carries— “As a control, we also presented two nonpredictive cues, both in the supraliminal and subliminal conditions.” | controls[0] |
| audit | visual awareness —operationalised-as→ double dissociation — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the double-dissociation framework is USED TO disentangle conscious from nonconscious processing; operationalised-as is loose.— “Because this approach predicts that completely opposite signatures of performance would emerge only if there were both… | concept_edges[0] |
| edge | subliminal —contrasted-with→ supraliminal | concept_edges[1] |
| audit | visual awareness —distinct-from→ nonconscious processing — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span writes 'conscious' and 'nonconscious processing' / 'aware', not 'visual awareness'. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[2] |
| audit | nonconscious processing —operationalised-as→ subliminal — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but subliminal cueing is the method for nonconscious processing; operationalised-as is loose. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[3] |
| outcome | control — held Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | controls[0] |
| replication | replicated | |
| limitation | Awareness in monkeys could not be probed verbally, so the inference rests on the behavioural pattern alone. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| limitation | No subjective reports were collected from the monkeys; the subliminal thresholds were imported from the human procedure. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| limitation | The nonconscious effect may arise from low-level attentional orienting or residual visual traces rather than from a richer nonconscious process. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The inference rests on a behavioural signature, not on any access to experience - the explanatory gap the paper cites is not closed by it. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[3] |
| limitation | Awareness of the subliminal cue is established by self-report and a forced-choice test, both of which are null results rather than proof of absence. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| limitation | The whole approach assumes the human dissociation transfers to another species; before this paper there was no evidence it does. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | Subliminal incongruent cues slowed human target detection relative to baseline even though participants reported and tested as unaware of them, establishing nonconscious processing. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | Rhesus monkeys in the subliminal condition were significantly slower to detect the target than in the baseline with two nonpredictive subliminal cues. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | Like the human participants, the monkeys failed to ignore the subliminal cues and showed no signs of learning. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | Supraliminal-condition participants who reported no awareness of the cue's predictive value were not faster than baseline (324 ms against 312 ms). Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | Cue awareness, not cue saliency (the cue stayed hard to see at 33 ms), appears to be the critical factor in performance. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | Performance stayed significantly below chance on trials where participants reported no awareness of the cue's location. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | Rhesus monkeys show a double-dissociation pattern remarkably similar to that of humans. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[6] |
| finding | Humans are much faster with a visible incongruent cue than with an invisible one - the conscious condition helps. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[7] |
| finding | The same cue presented invisibly does the opposite: participants who saw nothing were nevertheless slowed relative to baseline. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[8] |
| finding | The double-dissociation signatures were first established in humans across seven experiments and then found in similar form in rhesus monkeys. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[9] |
| finding | Earlier work established only single dissociations, which show animals have properties resembling conscious or nonconscious processing without separating the two. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[10] |
| quantity | mean = 43.5% correct, P = 0.00018 — Monkeys' below-chance accuracy in the subliminal forced-guessing condition and its combined binomial probability Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 42% versus 25% — Share of human participants falling in the lowest binomial p-value quartile versus the share expected by chance Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | 94.6% correct, SD = 3.7% — Human accuracy in the supraliminal forced-guessing condition (eye-tracking modality) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | 4 monkeys, 145 humans — Total subjects across the seven experiments Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | 75% — Participants who became aware of the cues and used them when only 20% of trials carried a supraliminal cue Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| quantity | 250 ms versus 17/33 ms — Cue exposure durations defining the supraliminal and subliminal conditions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[5] |
| quantity | 1.2% — Human error rate, which did not differ between supraliminal and subliminal conditions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[6] |
| quantity | 50% — Chance level in the forced-guessing task, above which performance requires using the incongruent cue Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[7] |
| quantity | 250 ms vs 17/33 ms — supraliminal versus subliminal cue durations - the manipulation the whole design turns on Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[8] |
| quantity | seven experiments — size of the series, humans then monkeys Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[9] |
| quantity | 200 ms fixation — gaze hold required to register a response, the nonverbal substitute for a button press Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[10] |
| variable | response time (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[2] |
| variable | gaze frequency (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[4] |
| definition | spatial-cueing paradigm Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | forced-guessing paradigm Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | cross-over double dissociation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[6] |
| definition | supraliminal stimuli Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[8] |
| definition | subliminal stimuli Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[9] |
| key-terms | double dissociation, subliminal, supraliminal, visual awareness, nonconscious processing, spatial-cueing paradigm, explanatory gap, single dissociations, theory of mind, rhesus monkeys |
| concept | double dissociation — not defined in this paper's own words; a design in which two conditions produce opposite effects, so that the crossing itself - not either half - licenses the inference of two underlying processes Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| concept | single dissociations — not defined in this paper's own words; the weaker design used in earlier animal work: one effect consistent with a process, which cannot separate the two processes Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[1] |
| concept | subliminal — not defined in this paper's own words; presented too briefly to be consciously detected - here 17 or 33 ms, then masked Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[2] |
| concept | supraliminal — not defined in this paper's own words; presented long enough to be consciously seen - here 250 ms Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[3] |
| concept | nonconscious processing — not defined in this paper's own words; processing of a stimulus the subject cannot report and cannot disregard Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[4] |
| concept | visual awareness — not defined in this paper's own words; the mode in which a stimulus is consciously accessible and can be reasoned about strategically Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[5] |
| concept | spatial-cueing paradigm — not defined in this paper's own words; a task in which a cue precedes a target in the opposite location, and the response is a saccade Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[6] |
| concept | explanatory gap — not defined in this paper's own words; the distance between behavioural evidence and any claim about experience, which this literature treats as unclosed Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[7] |
| concept | theory of mind — not defined in this paper's own words; invoked by one camp as a prerequisite for consciousness, restricting it to humans and a few apes Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[8] |
| linear mixed model | as written: linear mixed models Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| F-test F | as written: F (1,3585) = 315.66, P < 0.0001 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| correlation r | as written: r = −0.86, P < 0.001 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
| binomial test P | as written: individuals’ binomial test’s P values Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
| chi-squared test χ | as written: χ (1) = 5.33, P = 0.021 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[4] |
| chi-squared test χ | as written: χ (3) = 16.67, P < 0.001 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[5] |
| standard error of the mean SEM | as written: SEM of monkey trials Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[6] |
| mean and standard deviation SD | as written: mean= 94.6% correct, SD = 3.7% Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[7] |
| learning-slope correlation r | as written: flat learning slope, mean r(383) = 0.005, P = 0.92 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[8] |
| anova F | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[9] |
| statistical-significance P | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[10] |
| binomial-test binomial | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[11] |
| claim type | existence — a second reading reaching the same value; recorded: existence Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | alternatives.claim_type |
| phenomenon | cross-over double dissociation between conscious and nonconscious visual processing — a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value; recorded: double dissociation of visual awareness in nonhuman primates Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | alternatives.phenomenon |
When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824