MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913354639 · doi:10.1002/9781118911389.hautc32

Augmentative and Alternative Communication

2014· other· en· W2913354639 on OpenAlex
Pat Mirenda

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmentative and alternative communicationAutism spectrum disorderAutismPsychologyPsychological interventionGestureComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionAugmentativeCommunicationCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyLinguisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Approximately 25\% of individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are unable to use speech as their primary mode of communication and thus require augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) supports such as manual signs, picture communication books, or speech‐generating devices. AAC techniques can be used to support language development in general, as well as to support functional communication for individuals across the range of age and ability. AAC instruction can be provided through structured teaching (e.g., the Picture Communication System, PECS), naturalistic/milieu teaching, and aided language modeling. Potential collateral effects of AAC interventions include enhanced speech production and decreases in problem behavior.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.399 · 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