O PROCESSAMENTO DE NARRATIVAS EM SEGUNDA LÍNGUA: UM ESTUDO COM fNIRS
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
! 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.
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) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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