Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in statistical learning in developmental studies stems from the observation that 8-month-olds were able to extract words from a monotone speech stream solely using the transition probabilities (TP) between syllables (). A simple mechanism was thus part of the human infant’s toolbox for discovering regularities in language. Since this seminal study, observations on statistical learning capabilities have multiplied across domains and species, challenging the hypothesis of a dedicated mechanism for language acquisition. Here, we leverage the two dimensions conveyed by speech –speaker identity and phonemes– to examine (1) whether neonates can compute TPs on one dimension despite irrelevant variation on the other and (2) whether the linguistic dimension enjoys an advantage over the voice dimension. In two experiments, we exposed neonates to artificial speech streams constructed by concatenating syllables while recording EEG. The sequence had a statistical structure based either on the phonetic content, while the voices varied randomly (Experiment 1) or on voices with random phonetic content (Experiment 2). After familiarisation, neonates heard isolated duplets adhering, or not, to the structure they were familiarised with. In both experiments, we observed neural entrainment at the frequency of the regularity and distinct Event-Related Potentials (ERP) to correct and incorrect duplets, highlighting the universality of statistical learning mechanisms and suggesting it operates on virtually any dimension the input is factorised. However, only linguistic duplets elicited a specific ERP component, potentially an N400 precursor, suggesting a lexical stage triggered by phonetic regularities already at birth. These results show that, from birth, multiple input regularities can be processed in parallel and feed different higher-order networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".