MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129809535 · doi:10.1017/s0714980815000173

TEFREP: Épreuve de répétition de phrases en franco-québécois. Développement, validation et normalisation

2015· article· en· W2129809535 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josiane Bourgeois-Marcotte, Maximiliano A. Wilson, Martin Forest, Laura Monetta

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentenceRepetition (rhetorical device)PsychologyPhraseAphasiaAudiologyPrimary progressive aphasiaTask (project management)LinguisticsCognitive psychologyNatural language processingComputer scienceMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sentence repetition is part of the assessment tasks used to better characterise aphasic patients' oral production. Moreover, impaired sentence and phrase repetition is a core feature of the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia. The aim of this study is to present the TEFREP (TEst Français de RÉpétition de Phrases), a French sentence repetition task that manipulates psycholinguistic variables known to affect the performance of aphasic patients. The final version of the TEFREP consists of 24 sentences in which length, semantic reversibility and type of sentence have been manipulated. The task shows good psychometric properties (validity and reliability). Norms according to age and education level have been developed from a sample of 80 healthy adults and older adults. In conclusion, the TEFREP fulfills the current need for a reliable assessment tool of sentence repetition in Canadian French-speaking populations and contributes to the differential diagnosis of language impairment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFrench-language works237,207