Speech Production Errors in Adults With and Without Down Syndrome Following Verbal, Written, and Pictorial Cues
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
Adults with Down syndrome and adults with developmental delays not related to Down syndrome were asked to read, repeat, and formulate speech from a picture following the presentation of 2- and 4-word and picture sequences. The speech sequences were produced either immediately after stimulus presentation or following a 5-sec response delay. Overall, participants with Down syndrome produced more memory errors than persons without Down syndrome. Participants with Down syndrome also committed more speech production errors than the other participants, but only when they were required to repeat what they had heard, or to formulate speech from pictures. The speech production performance of the two groups was equivalent in the read condition. These results are discussed with reference to Elliott, Weeks, and Elliott's (1987) model of cerebral specialization, and to verbal short-term memory in persons with Down syndrome.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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