MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142791468 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00511

Fast phonetic learning in very young infants: what it shows, and what it doesn't show

2014· article· en· W2142791468 on OpenAlexafffund
Ocke‐Schwen Bohn, Linda Polka

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre for Research on Brain Language and Music
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDanmarks GrundforskningsfondNational Research Foundation
KeywordsPsychologyVolume (thermodynamics)Cognitive psychologyLinguisticsDevelopmental psychologyCognitive science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GENERAL COMMENTARY article Front. Psychol., 02 June 2014Sec. Psychology of Language Volume 5 - 2014 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00511

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207