Bibliographic record
Abstract
03–174 Andrews, Stephen (U. of Hong Kong SAR, China; Email : sandrews@hkucc.hku.hk ), Fullilove, John and Wong, Yama . Targeting washback – a case-study. System (Oxford, UK), 30 , 2 (2002), 207–23. 03–175 Bourguignon, Claire (Université du Havre, France). L'importance de la représentation dans l'activité d'évaluation de la communication langagière: application au project europoliglot. [The importance of representation patterns in assessing linguistic communication: A multi-language application – project EUROPOLIGLOT.] Les Cahiers de l'APLIUT (Grenoble, France), 21 , 2 (2001), 62–78. 03–176 Esmaeili, Hameed . Integrated reading and writing tasks and ESL students' reading and writing performance in an English language test. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes (Toronto, Ont.), 58 , 4 (2002), 599–622. 03–177 Ginther, April (Purdue U., USA; Email : aginther@purdue.edu ). Context and content visuals and performance on listening comprehension stimuli. Language Testing (London, UK), 19 , 2 (2002), 133–67. 03–178 Godev, Concepción B. (U. of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA), Martinez-Gibson, Elizabeth A. and Toris, Carol C. M. Foreign language reading comprehension test: L1 versus L2 in open-ended questions. Foreign Language Annals (New York, USA), 35 , 2 (2002), 202–21. 03–179 Goodfellow, Robin (Open U., Milton Keynes, UK; Email : r.goodfellow@open.ac.uk ), Lamy, Marie-Noëlle and Jones, Glyn . Assessing learners' writing using lexical frequency. ReCALL (Cambridge, UK), 14 , 1 (2002), 133–45. 03–180 Issac, Fabrice (Université Paris-Nord, France; Email : fabrice.issac@lli.univ-paris13.fr ) and Hû, Olivier . Formalism for evaluation: Feedback on learner knowledge representation. Computer Assisted Language Learning (Lisse, The Netherlands), 15 , 2 (2002), 183–99. 03–181 Kim, Duk-Ja (Hansung U., Seoul, Korea; Email : deog@hansung.ac.kr ) and Kyungmi, O. Washback on 12th grade English classes of the English tests within Korean University entrance exams. English Teaching (Korea), 57 , 3 (2002), 303–31. 03–182 Kobayashi, Miyoko (U. of Warwick, UK; Email : Miyoko.Kobayashi@warwick.ac.uk ). Method effects on reading comprehension test performance: Text organisation and response format. Language Testing (London, UK), 19 , 2 (2002), 193–220. 03–183 Major, Roy C. (Arizona State U., Tucson, USA), Fitzmaurice, Susan F., Bunta, Ferenc and Balasubramanian, Chandrika . The effects of nonnative accents on listening comprehension: Implications for ESL assessment. TESOL Quarterly (Alexandria, VA, USA), 36 , 2 (2002), 173–90. 03–184 Meara, Paul, Jacobs, Gabriel and Rodgers, Catherine (U. of Wales Swansea, UK; Email : p.m.meara@swan.ac.uk ). Lexical signatures in foreign language free-form texts. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics (Leuven, Belgium), 135–136 (2002), 85–96. 03–185 Myers, Marie J. (Queens U., Ontario, Canada; Email : myersmj@educ.queensu.ca ). Computer-assisted second language assessment: To the top of the pyramid. ReCALL (Cambridge, UK), 14 , 1 (2002), 167–81. 03–186 O'Loughlin, Kieran (The U. of Melbourne, Australia; Email : kjo@unimelb.edu.au ). The impact of gender in oral proficiency testing. Language Testing (London, UK), 19 , 2 (2002), 169–92. 03–187 Orr, Michael (The British Council, Valencia, Spain; Email : mike.orr@es.britcounc.org ). The FCE Speaking test: Using rater reports to help interpret test scores. System (Oxford, UK), 30 , 2 (2002), 143–54. 03–188 Patri, Mrudula (City U. of Hong Kong; Email : elpatri@cityu.edu.hk ). The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing (London, UK), 19 , 2 (2002), 109–31. 03–189 Song, Bailin and August, Bonne (City U. of New York, USA; Email : bsong@kbcc.cuny.edu ). Using portfolios to assess the writing of ESL students: A powerful alternative? Journal of Second Language Writing (Norwood, NJ, USA), 11 , 1 (2002), 49–72. 03–190 Wilhelm, Kim Hughes and Rivers, Marilyn (Southern Illinois U., USA). An audience approach to EAP writing assessment: Learners, teachers, outsiders. Applied Language Learning (Presidio of Monterey, CA, USA), 12 , 2 (2001), 177–90. 03–191 Yien, Liju (Nat. Lien Ho Inst. of Technology, Taiwan). Effective test-taking strategies on English tests: Implications from Taiwanese students. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics (Hong Kong), 6 , 2 (2001), 22–43.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".