Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and Successive (PASS) model is offered as an alternative to the unidimensional conceptualization of intelligence as a general ability. The unidimensional conceptualization has not helped researchers and clinicians understand variations of cognitive functions within special populations such as individuals with learning disabilities, disorders of attention, or mental retardation. Neither has this conceptualization aided in program planning for these individuals. PASS is a model of cognitive function based on contemporary research in both cognition and neuropsychology and provides a theory for both assessment and intervention. This article reviews concepts and examples of PASS theory and its application to reading disabilities and mental retardation. For example, the article links dyslexia with a deficit in successive processing. It also identifies the major difficulties of individuals with Down syndrome in phonological memory and articulation. Further research on successive processing, and planning as it relates to language, is suggested.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".