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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Definitions of comprehensibility over the last several decades are provided and comprehensibility's relationship to the related but partially independent speech dimensions of intelligibility and accent are explained. Comprehensibility's roots in World Englishes are explored, and its significance to L2 speakers and listeners is demonstrated with key research findings. The importance of comprehensibility over accentedness is highlighted, and approaches teachers can take to enhance their students' comprehensibility by incorporating pronunciation instruction in their second language classes are outlined. Non‐native English‐speaking teachers (NNESTs) often feel conflicted about teaching pronunciation, but if the pedagogical goal is comprehensibility, native English‐speaking teachers (NESTs) should not be given priority over NNESTs. Context dictates many factors affecting comprehensibility. Finally, suggestions are made for helping interlocutors to become better listeners.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it