Speech perception as a window for understanding plasticity and commitment in language systems of the brain
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
In this article, we provide a critical review of the literature on speech perception and phonological processing in infancy, and in populations with different experiential histories as a window to understanding how the notion of critical periods might apply to the acquisition of one part of language: the sound system. We begin by suggesting the use of the term "optimal period" because (a) both the onset (opening) and offset (closing) of openness to experience is variable rather than absolute and (b) phonological acquisition involves the emergence of a series of nested capabilities, each with its own sensitive period and each best explained at one of several different levels of specificity. In support, we cite evidence suggesting that to fully understand plasticity and commitment in phonological acquisition, it is necessary to consider not only the biological and experiential factors which may contribute to the onset and the offset of openness to experience but also how the sequentially developing parts of phonology constrain and direct development. In summary, we propose a nested, cascading model wherein biology, experience, and functional use each contribute.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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