MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626661492

Modeling age of exposure in L2 learning of vowel categories

2010· article· en· W2626661492 on OpenAlexaff
Meghan Clayards, Joseph C. Toscano

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVowelAge of AcquisitionPsychologyLanguage acquisitionLinguisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSpeech recognitionMathematics educationCognition
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modeling age of exposure in L2 learning of vowel categories Meghan Clayards McGill University Joseph Toscano University of Iowa Abstract: Age of exposure is known to be an important indicator of second language proficiency. Native-like phonological proficiency is attained only by learners exposed at the earliest ages. This paper examines one account of age-of-exposure effects. Two computational models (a mixture of Gaussians and a neural network) were trained without supervision on F1 and F2 tokens based on production data from two different vowel systems (Quichua and Spanish; Guion, 2003). Both models learn the individual phonological systems when trained on monolingual distributions. When exposed to bilingual data, both models also achieve varying degrees of success depending on when the second language (Spanish) is introduced in training, paralleling data from bilingual speakers with different ages of acquisition (Guion, 2003). This demonstrates that learners may be restricted in learning a second language not because of a biological critical period, but by the commitments that the system has already made to the first language.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207