MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405758940 · doi:10.1121/10.0034717

Individual differences in the distributional learning and overnight consolidation of the Mandarin level-falling tone contrast

2024· article· en· W4405758940 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yin-To Chui, Zhen Qin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContrast (vision)Mandarin ChinesePsychologyAptitudeCognitive psychologyConsolidation (business)VocabularyTone (literature)AudiologyWorking memoryLinguisticsCognitionDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In perceptual studies, musicality and pitch aptitude have been implicated in tone learning, while vocabulary size has been implicated in distributional (segment) learning. Moreover, working memory plays a role in the overnight consolidation of explicit-declarative L2 learning. This study examines how these factors uniquely account for individual differences in the distributional learning and consolidation of an L2 tone contrast, where learners are tonal language speakers, and the training is implicit. Following a previous study investigating distributional tone learning, 66 L1-Cantonese participants who learned and consolidated a Mandarin level-falling tone contrast through distributional exposure were measured in a pitch threshold task, Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Amusia, Mandarin Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, and an Operation Span task. Pitch threshold predicted immediate learning improvement while working memory predicted overnight consolidation by a bimodal group (not a unimodal group). The findings imply that pitch aptitude may be important in encoding stepwise tonal tokens, and the predictive power of working memory in overnight consolidation extends to implicit tone learning. Meanwhile, musical aptitude may not confer an additional advantage for speakers with native-tone experiences, and learners with a larger L2 vocabulary size might have resisted adaptation to distributional exposure because of robust L2 tonal representations.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicNeuroscience and Music Perception→French-language works237,207→