Stress consistency and stress regularity effects in Russian
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
This paper presents findings from the analysis of a Russian word corpus and two studies assessing the effects of stress consistency and stress regularity on performance in naming and lexical decision tasks. An examination of the impact of stress in Russian is particularly interesting because, although there is no regular stress pattern overall, first-syllable stress is regular for adjectives. The results demonstrated a processing advantage for regularly stressed adjectives in both tasks. For nouns and verbs, which have no clear regular stress pattern, no differences in the processing of initial- vs. final-stressed words were observed. Further, an advantage in the processing of words with consistent vs. inconsistent spelling-to-stress mappings was detected for all words in naming, but only for irregularly stressed adjectives in lexical decision. These findings provide evidence that readers are sensitive to both stress consistency and stress regularity even when regularity exists only for words of a single grammatical category.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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