MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167770146 · doi:10.1177/0142723705056074

When level-ordering is not used in the formation of English compounds

2005· article· en· W2167770146 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Nicoladis

Bibliographic record

VenueFirst Language · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObject (grammar)LinguisticsVerbPsychologyMathematicsComputer scienceNatural language processingArtificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To explain the fact that children avoid using regular plurals in modifiers of English compounds by three years, it has been argued that level-ordering constrains all their compounds (e.g., Gordon, 1985). If so, children should avoid regular plurals in ungrammatical compounds like Verb-Object and Verb-Object-er which they use while acquiring grammatical Object-Verb-er compounds (like ‘truck driver’). Children between 3 and 5 years were asked to form novel compounds describing machines acting on objects. The first study included 42 English monolingual children and the second study 36 French-English bilingual children. Both groups of children used significantly more regular plurals in ungrammatical compounds than in grammatical compounds. These results suggest that the avoidance of regular plurals is learned in conjunction with learning the kinds of compounds English allows.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFirst LanguageSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207