MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120395330 · doi:10.3989/loquens.2019.066

The perception-prodution link and linguistic theory

2019· article· en· W3120395330 on OpenAlex

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

VenueLoquens · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistic research and analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionLinguisticsPsychologySelection (genetic algorithm)Focus (optics)Cognitive psychologySpeech perceptionPoint (geometry)Theoretical linguisticsSet (abstract data type)Cognitive sciencePhilosophyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent trends in infant (and adult) speech perception studies, especially in the psychological literature where much of the speech perception work is being and has been done, shows a growing focus on more integrated perception-production-sensorimotor (PPS) bases for perception (Werker & Gervain 2013). We look here at whether the results of such studies are significant for theoretical linguistics – specifically for the fundamental question of how the linguistic system is acquired. We examine a selection of recent experimental results, using Bruderer, Danielson, Kandhadai & Werker (2015) as the focal point.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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