Cited by 212Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationComplex Network Analysis TechniquesAlgorithms and Data Compression

Euclidean distance between syntactically linked words

Open access
Ferrer i Cancho, Ramon·2004·Physical Review E

Abstract

We study the Euclidean distance between syntactically linked words in sentences. The average distance is significantly small and is a very slowly growing function of sentence length. We consider two nonexcluding hypotheses: (a) the average distance is minimized and (b) the average distance is constrained. Support for (a) comes from the significantly small average distance real sentences achieve. The strength of the minimization hypothesis decreases with the length of the sentence. Support for (b) comes from the very slow growth of the average distance versus sentence length. Furthermore, (b) predicts, under ideal conditions, an exponential distribution of the distance between linked words, a trend that can be identified in real sentences.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physreve.70.056135

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Human language dependencies tend to be much shorter than expected by chance (dependency length minimization).

    “It has been observed in human language that dependencies tend to be much shorter than expected by chance, a phenomenon known as dependency length minimization (Ferrer-i-Cancho 2004; Futrell et al. 2015).”

    From Contrasting Linguistic Patterns in Human and LLM-Generated News Text (2024) · cites this paper as Ferrer-i-Cancho 2004

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. R. Hudson, Word Grammar (Blackwell, Oxford, 1984).
  2. R. Ferrer i Cancho, R. V. Solé, and R. Köhler, Phys. Rev. E 69, 051915 (2004).
  3. A. Baddeley, Working Memory (Clarendon, Oxford, 1986).
  4. M. D. Hauser, N. Chomsky, and W. T. Fitch, Science 298, 1569 (2002).
  5. E. Gibson, Image, Language, Brain (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000), pp. 95-126.
  6. R. Ferrer i Cancho and R. V. Solé, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 788 (2003).
  7. T. Nishikawa, A. E. Motter, Y.-C. Lai, and F. C. Hoppensteadt, Phys. Rev. E 66, 046139 (2002).
  8. N. Mathias and V. Gopal, Phys. Rev. E 63, 021117 (2001).
  9. A. K. S. S. Manna, J. Phys. A 36, L279 (2003).
  10. M. Barthélemy, Europhys. Lett. 63, 915 (2003).
  11. J. Díaz, J. Petit, and M. Serna, ACM Comput. Surv. 34, 313 (2002).
  12. L. Uhlírova, I. Nebeská, and J. Králík, in COLING 82, Pro- ceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computa- tional Linguistics, Prague, 1982, edited by J. Horecký (North- Holland, Amsterdam, 1982), pp. 391-396.
  13. Y. Koren and D. Harel, in Proceedings of 28th International Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science (WG'02), Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 2573 (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2002), pp. 293-306.
  14. Y. Shiloach, SIAM J. Comput. 8, 15 (1979).
  15. F. R. K. Chung, Comput. Math. Appl. 10, 43 (1984).
  16. E. W. Montroll and M. F. Shlesinger, J. Stat. Phys. 32, 209 (1983).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ferrer i Cancho, R.
Venue
Physical Review E
Published
2004-11-30
Volume
70
Issue
5
Pages
056135-056135
ISSN
  • 1539-3755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-2376
OpenAlex
W1984940486
Cited by
212
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 35
FWCI
25.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review E (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Algorithms and Data Compression
Keywords
syntactic distance, sentence length, word order, exponential distribution, syntactic structure, language statistics
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Natural Language Processing, Terminology as Topic, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Semantics, Statistics as Topic, Linear Models, Vocabulary, Controlled

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review