Maintenance and Generalization Effects of Semantic and Phonological Treatments of Anomia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anomia is one of the most frequent manifestations in aphasia. Model-based treatments for anomia usually focus on semantic and/or phonological levels of processing. This study reports treatment of anomia in an individual with chronic aphasia. After baseline testing, she received a training program in which semantic and phonological treatments were contrasted. The semantic treatment resulted in generalization to closely semantically related untreated items. Moreover, this beneficial effect was highly durable and maintained at the immediate posttreatment level for at least 3 months. However, the positive response to the phonological treatment was limited to treated stimuli only. This case study demonstrates that improvement in word-finding abilities may be possible in chronic anomic aphasia, even after a relatively short period of therapy. It also underlines the importance of relying on theoretical models of language processing to adapt treatments to each specific deficit.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it