MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095788763 · doi:10.1075/bpa.10.02mez

The application of bilingual phonological learning models to early second language development

2020· book-chapter· en· W3095788763 on OpenAlex
Rabia Sabah Meziane, Andrea A. N. MacLeod

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

VenueBilingual processing and acquisition · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTagalogLinguisticsConsonantPsychologyPhonological developmentLanguage acquisitionContrast (vision)PhonologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhilosophyVowel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The goal of this chapter is to review how bilingual phonological learning models can be applied to understanding early second language development among children in kindergarten. Specifically, we review Best’s Perceptual Assimilation Model, Flege’s Speech Learning Model, Kuhl’s Language Magnet Model, and Willem van Leussen & Escudero’s Second Language Phonetic Model. We present results from a study of 25 children who were attending kindergarten in French and who spoke Tagalog and English at home. The children’s consonant productions in a word naming task were transcribed and analysed. Although the results did not align with a single model, it was useful conceptually to contrast “shared” versus “unshared” phonemes as the “unshared” phonemes were produced with lower accuracy overall.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.253 · 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