Chapter 4. Dyadic evidence for grounding with abstract deictic gestures
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
Speakers use gestures to communicate within a dialogue, not as isolated individuals. We therefore analyzed gestural communication within dyadic dialogues. Specifically, we microanalyzed grounding (the sequence of steps by which speaker and addressee ensure their mutual understanding) in a task that elicited abstract deictic gestures. Twenty-two dyads designing a hypothetical floor plan together without writing implements often used gestures to describe these non-existent spaces. We examined the 552 gestures (97% of the database) that conveyed information that was not presented in the accompanying words. A highly reliable series of analyses tracked the immediate responses to these non-redundant speech-gesture combinations. In the vast majority of cases, the addressee’s response indicated understanding, and the speaker/gesturer’s actions confirmed that this understanding was correct.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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