MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379055835 · doi:10.3765/amp.v10i0.5429

The Calibrated Error-Driven Ranking Algorithm as a Solution to Oscillation in Antagonistic Constraints: A Necessary Bias for Algorithmic Learning of Kihnu Estonian

2023· article· en· W4379055835 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaili Vesik

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Meetings on Phonology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstonianComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceVowel harmonyHarmony (color)Constraint (computer-aided design)VowelNatural language processingSpeech recognitionMachine learningMathematicsLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the learning of Kihnu Estonian, a minority dialect of Estonian (Balto-Finnic). I propose a set of constraints to account for Kihnu Estonian vowel harmony patterns, and show that they can be used to produce a restrictive grammar for Kihnu Estonian vowel harmony. With this constraint set, I model the acquisition of Kihnu Estonian vowel harmony via the application of the Gradual Learning Algorithm (Boersma and Hayes, 2001). Antagonistic constraints in the set I adopt pose obstacles to successful learning of the vowel patterns attested in the learning data. These obstacles can be circumvented via use of the update rule from the Calibrated Error-Driven Ranking Algorithm (Magri, 2012).This update rule has been argued to be detrimental to learning variation in stochastic OT. However, though it was originally proposed to address the Credit Problem (Dresher, 1999), I show that it is in fact an elegant solution to the learning problems caused by oscillating constraints when modeling acquisition of Kihnu Estonian vowel harmony.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Meetings on PhonologySame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207