MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323351622 · doi:10.1044/2022_jslhr-22-00261

Exploring the Sentence Length and Age of Acquisition of Speech Recognition Test Sentences in Dutch, American English, and Canadian French

2023· article· en· W4323351622 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hanneke E. M. van der Hoek-Snieders, Koenraad S. Rhebergen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentenceLinguisticsPsychologyAmerican EnglishRepetition (rhetorical device)Age of AcquisitionTest (biology)AudiologyCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the differences between the age of acquisition (AoA) and sentence length of sentences of the speech recognition (SR) tests for adults and children in Dutch, American English, and Canadian French. METHOD: The AoA and sentence length of the sentences of four SR tests for adults and children were determined. One-way analyses of variance were performed to assess differences between the tests. RESULTS: The AoA and sentence length of the sentences significantly differed between the SR tests for adults. These differences were also found between the SR tests for children. CONCLUSIONS: The AoA and the sentence length differ across the SR tests in Dutch, American English, and Canadian French. The Dutch sentences have higher AoA and are longer than the sentences in American English and Canadian French. The effect of the linguistic complexity on sentence repetition accuracy should be investigated during the development and validation of a Dutch SR test for children.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Speech Language and Hearing ResearchSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207