O PROCESSAMENTO DE NARRATIVAS EM SEGUNDA LÍNGUA: UM ESTUDO COM fNIRS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
! is article presents the results of a study which investigated theperformance of native speakers of English (L1) when reading texts in French(L2), language in which they had intermediate pro" ciency. ! e study investi-gated, in relation to behavioral performance, these readers’ accuracy and re-sponse times when processing the text at three di# erent levels (the macro- andthe micro-structure and the situational model), whereas, with respect to brainactivity, the study analyzed the participation of the two cerebral hemispheresin processing the three levels mentioned above, using the fNIRS (functionalNear-Infrared Spectroscopy) neuroimaging tool. ! e behavioral results showstatistically signi" cant di# erences between the two groups. ! e neuroimag-ing results indicate a statistically signi" cant participation of the two regionsof interest in temporal areas of the right hemisphere during processing at themacro-structure, as well as of temporal and frontal regions in the le$ hemi-sphere in comprehension at the microstructure.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".