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
Even after achieving a high level of English proficiency, our accents – along with involuntary code-switching, pronunciation of English words as they are pronounced in our native tongue, and more – may still give us away as EFLs. Accent is the most immediately noticeable feature of EFL speakers. After moving to North America, I was faced with a conflict: Should I preserve my foreign accent and embrace it as part of my identity or try to pass as an American? While the perception that all accents are valid is true, it is also – to some extent – naïve. It not only ignores the desire to assimilate into American culture but also minimizes the impact of implicit biases, which can go as far as labeling people with foreign accents as less competent. Another practical reason to develop a North American accent is to adjust to personal assistants such as Siri and Alexa that often fail to understand foreign accents. At the same time as the world is becoming more progressive and inclusive, language technology sometimes inadvertently pushes us a step back.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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