Development and Evaluation of an English Language Measure of Detection of Word-Final Plurality Markers: The University of Western Ontario Plurals Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This article describes the development and evaluation of The University of Western Ontario (UWO) Plurals Test, which is an English language measure of detection of the word-final fricative cue for plurality. METHOD: Normative data are provided for 26 listeners with normal hearing and 24 listeners with hearing impairment (children and adults), as are evaluations of the acoustical properties of the stimuli, the test's test-retest reliability, and the test's sensitivity to changes in hearing aid signal processing (e.g., nonlinear frequency compression). RESULTS: Results indicate reliable, repeated outcome measurement at the level of the individual. When compared to a global measure of real-world listening preference, the UWO Plurals Test was found to be somewhat sensitive to the effects of changes in hearing aid signal processing. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest potential use of the UWO Plurals Test to evaluate aided and unaided ability of listeners between the ages of 6 and 81 years to detect the word-final fricatives /s/ and /z/ as they occur in English plural nouns.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".