Decision-tree models of categorization response times, choice proportions, and typicality judgments.
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
The authors present 3 decision-tree models of categorization adapted from T. Trabasso, H. Rollins, and E. Shaughnessy (1971) and use them to provide a quantitative account of categorization response times, choice proportions, and typicality judgments at the individual-participant level. In Experiment 1, the decision-tree models were fit to reaction time and choice proportion data from a study reported by A. L. Cohen and R. M. Nosofsky (2003). In Experiment 2, participants were also asked to provide typicality ratings for each stimulus. A process-tracing method called the "4-questions game" (Y. Sayeki, 1969) was used in a posttest phase to identify a decision tree for each participant. In both experiments, the decision-tree models explained a very high proportion of variance in the data and compared favorably with 2 leading exemplar models.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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