MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1945248830

The robustness of infants' early word representations

2009· article· en· W1945248830 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Marieke van Heugten, Elizabeth K. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMental lexiconSentenceLexiconPsychologyWord (group theory)LinguisticsSpeech recognitionDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceNatural language processing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was conducted to investigate the way infants started recognizing acoustically distinct realizations of words before developing mental lexicon. The study also investigated the possibility earlier studies underestimating infants' early word recognition abilities. It was proposed that presenting infants with brief exposure to disembodied unfamiliar voices producing words was not an ecologically valid measure of their capabilities. Twenty-four mothers and fathers were audio-taped, as their infants participated in the study. Mothers recorded two six-sentence passage in infant-directed speech that contained a target word occurring in every sentence. Investigations revealed that 7.5-month infants recognized familiarized words across speakers of different genders without facing problems with these words being presented in familiar or unfamiliar voices.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207