MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213305977 · doi:10.7820/vli.v10.2.mizumoto

Comparisons of word lists on new word level checker

2021· article· en· W4213305977 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

VenueVocabulary Learning and Instruction · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsWord (group theory)Computer scienceNatural language processingLinguisticsArtificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a novel online vocabulary profiling application called the New Word Level Checker (https://nwlc.pythonanywhere.com/) and word list resources used by the application. First, the rationale for developing another web vocabulary profiler and the word lists included in the application are described. Next, the lexical units (i.e., how words are counted) and rules (e.g., case sensitivity, contractions, abbreviations with periods, hyphenated words, and compounds) employed in the application are explained. Then, the word lists adopted for the application are compared to show which lists are best used for different purposes. Pedagogical implications of the use of the application and word lists are discussed, especially focusing on matching learners with vocabulary-level appropriate tests

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 score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.251 · 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