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
PURPOSE: This study compared performance of children on 2 tests of nonword repetition to investigate the factors that may contribute to the well-documented nonword repetition deficit in specific language impairment (SLI). METHOD: Twelve children with SLI age 7 to 11 years, 12 age-matched control children, and 12 control children matched for language ability completed 2 tests of nonword repetition: the Children's Test of Nonword Repetition (CNRep) and the Nonword Repetition Test (NRT). RESULTS: The children with SLI performed significantly more poorly on both tests than typically developing children of the same age. The SLI group was impaired on the CNRep but not the NRT relative to younger children with similar language abilities when adjustments were made for differences in general cognitive ability. The children with SLI repeated the lengthiest nonwords and the nonwords containing consonant clusters significantly less accurately than the control groups. CONCLUSION: The evidence suggests that the nonword repetition deficit in SLI may arise from a number of factors, including verbal short-term memory, lexical knowledge, and output processes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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