Unsupervised learning of vowel categories from infant-directed speech
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infants rapidly learn the sound categories of their native language, even though they do not receive explicit or focused training. Recent research suggests that this learning is due to infants' sensitivity to the distribution of speech sounds and that infant-directed speech contains the distributional information needed to form native-language vowel categories. An algorithm, based on Expectation-Maximization, is presented here for learning the categories from a sequence of vowel tokens without (i) receiving any category information with each vowel token, (ii) knowing in advance the number of categories to learn, or (iii) having access to the entire data ensemble. When exposed to vowel tokens drawn from either English or Japanese infant-directed speech, the algorithm successfully discovered the language-specific vowel categories (/I, i, epsilon, e/ for English, /I, i, e, e/ for Japanese). A nonparametric version of the algorithm, closely related to neural network models based on topographic representation and competitive Hebbian learning, also was able to discover the vowel categories, albeit somewhat less reliably. These results reinforce the proposal that native-language speech categories are acquired through distributional learning and that such learning may be instantiated in a biologically plausible manner.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".