MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410799422 · doi:10.1017/9781009366144.013

Developing reading

2025· book-chapter· en· W4410799422 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xuesong Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Literacy · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)Computer sciencePsychologyLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reading is critical for learning new information, acquiring new understandings and developing new cognitive skills. It is considered an essential skill for life, study and work in today’s world. In the Australian Curriculum, reading is regarded as a core component of literacy skills alongside ‘viewing, speaking, writing and creating’ texts for ‘a range of purposes’. The texts involved in students’ development of literacy can be multimodal, as they may use oral, visual and digital texts in addition to print texts. As a result, students are expected to ‘use a range of strategies to comprehend, interpret and analyse these texts, including retrieving and organizing literal information, making and supporting inferences and evaluating information and points of view’ when reading .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage and LiteracySame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207