MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1505584975 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v5n4p120

Experimental-Phonetic Analysis of the Phonetic Structure of Word

2015· article· en· W1505584975 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kifayat Alirzayeva, Mehriban Ibadullayeva, Gulnara Safarova

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural, Linguistic, Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLinguisticsWord (group theory)Natural language processingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article has been written on the basis of comparative-typological and experimental-phonetic methods in the study of the English and Azerbaijani languages belonging to different language systems (English belonging to analytical type of languages, Azerbaijani to the synthetic type of languages). The main aim of the investigation is to find out similarities and differentiations between (due to the acoustic parameters) phonetic structure of word in the monosyllabic and polysyllabic words in the English and the Azerbaijani languages. The analysis is based on experimental phonetic investigation. For the experiment PRAAT computer program has been used.

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 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)0.093
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicCultural, Linguistic, Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207