MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065092057 · doi:10.1080/17470210701623829

Language-Based Access to Gestural Components of Conceptual Knowledge

2008· article· en· W2065092057 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureObject (grammar)SentenceMeaning (existential)CommunicationCued speechPsychologyPriming (agriculture)Computer scienceLinguisticsCognitive psychologyNatural language processingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report two experiments in which production of articulated hand gestures was used to reveal the nature of gestural knowledge evoked by sentences referring to manipulable objects. Two gesture types were examined: functional gestures (executed when using an object for its intended purpose) and volumetric gestures (used when picking up an object simply to move it). Participants read aloud a sentence that referred to an object but did not mention any form of manual interaction (e.g., Jane forgot the calculator) and were cued after a delay of 300 or 750 ms to produce the functional or volumetric gesture associated with the object, or a gesture that was unrelated to the object. At both cue delays, functional gestures were primed relative to unrelated gestures, but no significant priming was found for volumetric gestures. Our findings elucidate the types of motor representations that are directly linked to the meaning of words referring to manipulable objects in sentences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.124
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it