MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075437537 · doi:10.1017/s0142716414000538

Commentary: Neuroplasticity as a model for bilingualism: Commentary on Baum and Titone—ADDENDUM

2014· article· en· W2075437537 on OpenAlexaff
Natalie A. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Psycholinguistics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Linguistics and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAddendumPsychologyNeuroplasticityNeuroscience of multilingualismNeurolinguisticsCognitive sciencePsychotherapistCognitive psychologyNeuroscienceLinguisticsPsycholinguisticsCognitionPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This commentary was not included with the original publication of the issue, but it has now been added to the online version.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0080.004
Research integrity0.0530.069
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.007

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied PsycholinguisticsSame topicHistorical Linguistics and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207