MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376288769 · doi:10.1075/sibil.64.02leo

From the spatial ego to cognitive control

2023· book-chapter· en· W4376288769 on OpenAlexaff
Sibylla Leon Guerrero, Gigi Luk

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in bilingualism · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscience of multilingualismCognitionSet (abstract data type)PsychologyCognitive scienceWork (physics)Asset (computer security)LinguisticsComputer scienceEngineeringNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ellen Bialystok’s early work from 1976–1988 has had a lasting influence on the fields of bilingualism and linguistics. This chapter reviews her seminal work establishing bilingualism as a cross-disciplinary area of study in 1976. It then explores Bialystok’s language processing research of the 1980’s, articulating two of her crucial, yet often overlooked achievements. First, Bialystok’s early information processing models for word-level representations set the stage for an explosion of cognitive bilingualism research by identifying cognitive processes involved in second language acquisition. Second, her work set a precedent for understanding the spectrum of language experiences and their complexities, providing essential insight into why even subtle distinctions should be considered and reported when describing bilinguals. Presciently, Bialystok’s early work anticipated current understandings and future directions for bilingualism research, making her sustained contributions to the area an invaluable asset for continued exploration.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.012
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in bilingualismSame topicNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFrench-language works237,207