Verb production in the nonfluent and semantic variants of primary progressive aphasia: The influence of lexical and semantic factors
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
Differential patterns of impairment with respect to noun and verb production have been observed in the nonfluent and semantic variants of primary progressive aphasia. However, the factors influencing this discrepancy remain unclear. The present study evaluates verb retrieval in primary progressive aphasia using a naming task and a story completion task. Findings indicate that patients with the semantic variant are influenced by familiarity, frequency, and age of acquisition in both object and action naming, whereas patients with the nonfluent variant are not. Surprisingly, there were no differences in either group between object and action naming, presumably because the lists were well matched on pertinent variables. In the story completion task, greater impairment in semantically heavier than in semantically lighter verbs was observed for the semantic variant, and grammaticality and verb tense agreement was significantly lower in the nonfluent variant. The present findings suggest that lexicosemantic attributes affect verb production in the semantic variant, whereas both lexicosemantic and syntactic attributes affect verb production in the nonfluent variant.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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