Semantic composition in experimental and naturalistic paradigms
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
Naturalistic paradigms using movies or audiobooks have become increasingly popular in cognitive neuroscience, but connecting them to findings from controlled experiments remains rare. Here, we aim to bridge this gap in the context of semantic composition in language processing, which is typically examined using a "minimal" two-word paradigm. Using magnetoencephalography (MEG), we investigated whether the neural signatures of semantic composition observed in an auditory two-word paradigm can extend to naturalistic story listening, and vice versa. Our results demonstrate consistent differentiation between phrases and single nouns in the left anterior and middle temporal lobe, regardless of the context. Notably, this distinction emerged later during naturalistic listening. Yet this latency difference disappeared when accounting for various factors in the naturalistic data, such as prosody, word rate, word frequency, surprisal, and emotional content. These findings suggest the presence of a unified compositional process underlying both isolated and connected speech comprehension.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it