Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
THE ISSUE A Proposal for Action: Strategies for Recognizing Heritage Language Competence as a Learning Resource within the Mainstream Classroom JIM CUMMINS, University of Toronto THE COMMENTARIES More than a Silver Bullet: The Role of Chinese as a Heritage Language in the United States SCOTT MCGINNIS, Defense Language Institute, Washington Office The Reemergence of Heritage and Community Language Policy in the U.S. National Spotlight TERRENCE G. WILEY, Arizona State University Positioning Heritage Languages in the United States OFELIA GARCÍA, Teachers College, Columbia University Opening and Filling Up Implementational and Ideological Spaces in Heritage Language Education NANCY H. HORNBERGER, The University of Pennsylvania The Use of Heritage Language: An African Perspective JANINA BRUTT–GRIFFLER, University of York, United Kingdom SINFREE MAKONI, The Pennsylvania State University A European Perspective on Heritage Languages KEES DE BOT, University of Groningen, The Netherlands DURK GORTER, University of Amsterdam & Fryske Akademy, The Netherlands
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it