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
Much pronunciation research critically relies upon listeners’ judgments of speech samples, but researchers have rarely examined the impact of methodological choices. In the current study, 30 German native listeners and 42 German L2 learners (L1 English) rated speech samples produced by English-German L2 learners along three continua: accentedness, fluency, and comprehensibility. The goal was to determine whether rating condition, that is, (a) whether each speech sample is rated along all three continua after it is heard once or (b) whether all speech samples are rated along one continuum before being rated along the next continuum, and continuum order (e.g., whether participants rate speech samples for accentedness before comprehensibility or fluency) have an effect on listeners’ ratings. Results indicate no significant overall effects of rating condition or continuum order, but there is evidence of rating condition effects by listener group. The results have implications for laboratory and classroom assessments of L2 speech.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 it