phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | one of the most-reported numbers in science, with no single definition once the model has random effects— “The coefficient of determination R 2 quantifies the proportion of variance explained by a statistical model and is an important summary statistic of biological interest. However, estimating R 2 for generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) remains challenging.” | |
| claim-type | method— “As shown in the electronic supplementary material, appendix S2, ln(1 + 1/ λ ) (lognormal approximation), 1/ λ (delta method approximation) and (trigamma function) give similar results when λ is greater than 2. Our recommendation is to use the trigamma function for obtaining whenever this is possible.” | |
| method — evidence | — “A comparison among equations (6.7)–(6.9) is also shown in electronic supplementary material, appendix S3 (it turns out equation (6.8) gives the best approximation). Simulation will give the most accurate conversions when no exact solutions are available.” | |
| object of study — evidence | — “The coefficient of determination R 2 quantifies the proportion of variance explained by a statistical model and is an important summary statistic of biological interest. However, estimating R 2 for generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) remains challenging.” | |
| research question — evidence | — “However, obtaining for specific distributions is not always possible, because in many families of GLMMs, (observation-level variance) cannot be clearly separated into (overdispersion variance) and (distribution-specific variance). It turns out that binomial and Poisson distributions are special cases where can be usefully calculated, because… | |
| contribution — evidence | — “As shown in the electronic supplementary material, appendix S2, ln(1 + 1/ λ ) (lognormal approximation), 1/ λ (delta method approximation) and (trigamma function) give similar results when λ is greater than 2. Our recommendation is to use the trigamma function for obtaining whenever this is possible.” | |
| mechanism | A NAMING RULE - WHEN A MODIFIER IN A NAME IS LICENSED: `In such a case, the ICC should not be called `ADJUSTED`. For an ICC value to be adjusted for a source of variance, that variance must be more than 0 and omitted from the ICC calculation.` A published condition on the use of one word inside a statistic's name - the same shape as buck2011's rule for when two fields may share an acronym, one level down— “In such a case, the ICC should not be called ‘adjusted’ ( sensu [ 2 ]). For an ICC value to be adjusted for a source of variance, that variance must be more than 0 and omitted from the ICC calculation.” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | AND ONE NAME FOR TWO QUANTITIES, KEPT APART BY A SUBSCRIPT: `MARGINAL AND CONDITIONAL R2 differ only in whether the random effect variance is included in the numerator` - the marginal is the proportion explained by the fixed effects, the conditional by fixed AND random. Two numbers a reader will see reported as `R2`— “where represents the marginal R 2 , which is the proportion of the total variance explained by the fixed effects, represents the conditional R 2 , which is the proportion of the variance explained by both fixed and random effects, and is the variance explained by fixed effects [ 11 ]. As marginal and conditional R 2 differ only in whether the… | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | AND A RENAMING WHERE THE NOTATION DELIBERATELY DOES NOT FOLLOW: `We refer to this generalized version ... as `THE OBSERVATION-LEVEL VARIANCE` here rather than the residual variance (but we keep the notation). Note that the observation-level variance should not be confused with the variance associated with OLRE, which ... can be considered to be A PART OF it.` The name changes, the symbol does not, and the sentence that renames it also warns which neighbouring term it is not— “However, as we will show below, we can always obtain the GLMM version of (on the latent scale) directly. We refer to this generalized version of as ‘the observation-level variance’ here rather than the residual variance (but we keep the notation ). Note that the observation-level variance, , should not be confused with the variance associated… | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | AND THE EARLIER DEFINITION WORKED ONLY FOR TWO SPECIAL CASES, SAID PLAINLY: `obtaining for specific distributions is not always possible, because in many families of GLMMs, (observation-level variance) cannot be clearly separated into (overdispersion variance) and (distribution-specific variance). It turns out that binomial and Poisson distributions are special cases where can be usefully calculated ... This is not the case for other families.` The general method was a special case and the authors are the ones who found out— “However, obtaining for specific distributions is not always possible, because in many families of GLMMs, (observation-level variance) cannot be clearly separated into (overdispersion variance) and (distribution-specific variance). It turns out that binomial and Poisson distributions are special cases where can be usefully calculated, because… | mechanisms[3] |
| mechanism | AND A DISTINCTION THE AUTHORS WITHDRAW FOR ONE FAMILY AND KEEP FOR ANOTHER: `In the past, we distinguished between ICC on the latent scale and on the observation scale. Such a distinction turns out to be strictly appropriate only for binomial distributions but not for Poisson distributions (and probably also not for other non-Gaussian distributions).` A retraction with its scope stated, including the part they are only probably right about— “In the past, we distinguished between ICC on the latent scale and on the observation scale [ 2 ]. Such a distinction turns out to be strictly appropriate only for binomial distributions but not for Poisson distributions (and probably also not for other non-Gaussian distributions). This is because the property of what we have called the… | mechanisms[4] |
| mechanism | AND THEY NAME WHAT THEY USED TO CALL IT: `note that we would have called 1/lambda THE DISTRIBUTION-SPECIFIC VARIANCE` - the same quantity, the old name, and the new one, in a parenthesis. The corpus has papers that rename things and papers that correct things; this one prints the substitution table— “As with the observation-level variance for the log-Poisson model (which is 1/ λ and changes with λ ; note that we would have called 1/ λ the distribution-specific variance; [ 2 , 3 ]), the observation-level variance of the binomial distribution changes as p changes (see electronic supplementary material, appendix S5), suggesting these two… | mechanisms[5] |
| mechanism | AND THE NAMING CHOICE MOVES EVERY REPORTED NUMBER, IN A KNOWN DIRECTION: `the MINIMUM VALUE of 1/(p(1-p)) IS 4, which is larger than pi^2/3 = 3.29, meaning that the use of 1/p(1-p) IN R2 and ICC for binary data will always produce larger values than those using pi^2/3.` Which term you call the denominator decides whether every R2 in a literature is larger or smaller - not a range, a DIRECTION, with a floor. And Browne et al. observed exactly that— “Further, the minimum value of 1/( p (1 – p )) is 4, which is larger than π 2 /3 ≈ 3.29, meaning that the use of 1/ p (1 – p ) in R 2 and ICC for binary data will always produce larger values than those using π 2 /3. Consequently, Browne et al . [ 14 ] showed that ICC values (or variance partition coefficients, VPCs) estimated using π 2 /3… | mechanisms[6] |
| mechanism | AND TWO OF THEIR OWN EARLIER RECOMMENDATIONS CONTRADICT EACH OTHER: `In our earlier papers, we proposed to use the exponential of the intercept ... WE ALSO SUGGESTED that it is possible to use the mean of observed values. Unfortunately, these two recommendations are often inconsistent with each other.` Two ways to compute one input, from one paper, that disagree | mechanisms[7] |
| mechanism | AND THE REASON IS THAT ONE OF THEM ESTIMATES A DIFFERENT LOCATION ENTIRELY: `In fact, exp(beta0) gives the median value of y rather than the mean ... Thus, the use of exp(beta0) will often OVERESTIMATE, providing SMALLER ESTIMATES OF R2 AND ICC ... when lambda is small, the difference can be substantial so the choice of the method needs to be reported for reproducibility.` A methods choice promoted to a reporting requirement because the two answers differ 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. | mechanisms[8] |
| mechanism | AND THREE ROUTES REACH ONE QUANTITY AND AGREE ONLY ABOVE A THRESHOLD: `ln(1 + 1/lambda) (LOGNORMAL APPROXIMATION), 1/lambda (DELTA METHOD APPROXIMATION) and (TRIGAMMA FUNCTION) GIVE SIMILAR RESULTS WHEN LAMBDA IS GREATER THAN 2. Our recommendation is to use the trigamma function.` Three names, one target, and a condition under which the choice stops mattering 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. | mechanisms[9] |
| extends | the authors' own earlier definitions of R2_GLMM and ICC_GLMM (Nakagawa & Schielzeth 2013; Nakagawa, Johnson & Schielzeth), which covered only binomial and Poisson families - 'It turns out that binomial and Poisson distributions are special cases' 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. | claim_relations[0] |
| contradicts | their own earlier distinction between ICC on the latent scale and on the observation scale, which 'turns out to be strictly appropriate only for binomial distributions but not for Poisson distributions' 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. | claim_relations[1] |
| sense | `marginal R2` - the proportion of total variance explained by the FIXED effects only; `conditional R2` - by fixed AND random. They `differ only in whether the random effect variance is included in the numerator` 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. | senses[0] |
| sense | `observation-level variance` (this paper) - the generalized residual term, explicitly renamed `rather than the residual variance` while KEEPING THE NOTATION, and not to be confused with the variance of an observation-level random effect 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. | senses[1] |
| sense | `distribution-specific variance` - what 1/lambda would have been called in the authors' earlier papers; kept as a separate concept for binomial distributions and declared not analogous 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. | senses[2] |
| sense | `repeatability R` (ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION) - a type of intra-class correlation where the grouping factor is individuals measured repeatedly 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. | senses[3] |
| sense | `adjusted ICC` - and the condition on the word: an ICC may only be called adjusted if the variance it is adjusted for is `MORE THAN 0 AND OMITTED FROM THE CALCULATION` 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. | senses[4] |
| control | deriving the same observation-level variance three independent ways - delta method, lognormal approximation, trigamma function - and comparing them — 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. — rules out a variance term that is an artefact of one derivation; they agree when lambda > 2 and the trigamma is recommended where it applies 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] |
| control | comparing their own bias-correction approximation against McCulloch et al.'s and Zeger et al.'s, and against simulation — failed 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. — rules out recommending their own formula without testing it - and the test says somebody else's is better 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[1] |
| control | requiring that the method used to obtain lambda be reported — partial 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. — rules out two papers reporting 'R2' from the same data and the same model with different numbers, because they estimated lambda differently 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[2] |
| weight | the authors' own earlier definitions of R2_GLMM and ICC_GLMM (Nakagawa & Schielzeth 2013; Nakagawa, Johnson & Schielzeth), which covered only binomial and Poisson families - 'It turns out that binomial and Poisson distributions are special cases' — 0.95 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. | claim_relations[0] |
| weight | their own earlier distinction between ICC on the latent scale and on the observation scale, which 'turns out to be strictly appropriate only for binomial distributions but not for Poisson distributions' — 0.9 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. | claim_relations[1] |
| note | marginal R 2 —distinct-from→ conditional R 2 — 'As MARGINAL AND…' One name for two numbers, kept apart by a subscript a reader may not carry across papers 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[0] |
| relation | marginal R 2 —distinct-from→ conditional R 2 — the two differ ONLY in whether the random-effect variance is in the numerator - and both are reported as 'R2' 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. | concept_edges[0] |
| weight | marginal R 2 —distinct-from→ conditional R 2 — 0.95 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[0] |
| note | observation-level variance —distinct-from→ distribution-specific variance — 'ARE ANALOGOUS…' The authors previously called one of these by the other's name - 'note that we would have called 1/lambda THE DISTRIBUTION-SPECIFIC VARIANCE' - and the edge records the distinction they drew afterwards 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[1] |
| relation | observation-level variance —distinct-from→ distribution-specific variance — the two observation-level variances are analogous to each other and the distribution-specific variance is not - which is why the term was renamed 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. | concept_edges[1] |
| weight | observation-level variance —distinct-from→ distribution-specific variance — 0.95 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[1] |
| note | median —distinct-from→ mean — 'In fact, exp(beta0) gives the median value of y rather than the mean of y, assuming a Poisson distribution. Thus, the use of exp(beta0) will often overestimate, providing smaller estimates of R2 AND ICC ... when lambda is small, the difference can be substantial so the choice of the method needs to be reported for reproducibility.' A textbook distinction with a reporting requirement attached to 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. | concept_edges[2] |
| relation | median —distinct-from→ mean — exp(beta0) estimates the MEDIAN where the formula requires the MEAN, so using it systematically shrinks R2 and ICC 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. | concept_edges[2] |
| weight | median —distinct-from→ mean — 0.95 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] |
| 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. | controls[0] |
| outcome | control — failed 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[1] |
| outcome | control — partial 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[2] |
| limitation | THEIR OWN APPROXIMATION IS NOT THE BEST ONE, AND THEY SAY SO: `A comparison among equations (6.7)-(6.9) is also shown in electronic supplementary material, appendix S3 (it turns out equation (6.8) gives the best approximation). Simulation will give the most accurate conversions when no exact solutions are available.` Equation 6.7 is theirs; 6.8 is McCulloch et al.'s 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 | AND A NEIGHBOURING STATISTIC IS ADMITTED INTO THE FAMILY WITH A HEDGE IN PARENTHESES: the trigamma function has been used for `heritability (which can be seen as a type of ICC although in a strict sense, it is not)`. A kindhood claim and its denial in eleven words - the corpus's `is-a` cannot carry that, so it is here in prose 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 | and one field renames the statistic outright: `a type of ICC is often referred to as repeatability R, where the grouping factor is often individuals that have been phenotyped repeatedly` - ecology and evolution's name for what the rest of the literature calls an intra-class correlation 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] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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] |
| quantity | 1/(p(1-p)) has a minimum of 4; pi^2/3 = 3.29 — 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 | lambda greater than 2 — 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 | equation (6.8), McCulloch et al.'s, not the authors' own (6.7) — 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.quantities[2] |
| variable | overdispersion 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[0] |
| definition | coefficient of determination 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[0] |
| definition | adjusted ICC 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[1] |
| concept | marginal R 2 — not defined in this paper's own words; variance explained by the fixed effects 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. | concepts[0] |
| concept | conditional R 2 — not defined in this paper's own words; variance explained by fixed and random effects together 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 | observation-level variance — not defined in this paper's own words; the generalized residual term, renamed here and keeping its old notation 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 | distribution-specific variance — not defined in this paper's own words; the term the authors previously used for the same quantity in Poisson models, and still use for binomial ones 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 | median — not defined in this paper's own words; what exp(beta0) actually estimates, against the mean that the formula needs 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 | mean — not defined in this paper's own words; the quantity required, and the reason the two earlier recommendations disagree 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] |
| intra-class correlation coefficient | 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] |
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