The basis of preference for lexical words in 6‐month‐old infants
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
Abstract Six‐month‐old English‐learning infants have been shown to prefer English lexical over English grammatical words. The preference is striking because there are few grammatical words in total number but each occurs far more frequently in input speech than any individual lexical word. This could be because lexical words are universally more salient and interesting acoustic and phonological forms than are grammatical words. Alternatively, familiarity may play a role since infants may know some specific lexical words. Here we explore the first possibility by testing Chinese‐learning infants’ response to English lexical and grammatical words. These infants, who had virtually no prior exposure to English and thus were unfamiliar with any English words, nevertheless preferred to listen to English lexical words, as in the case of English‐learning infants. This finding increases the plausibility that it is the acoustic and phonological salience of lexical words that determines the preference for lexical words in infants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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