MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416809269 · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2025.104705

A predictive coding model for online sentence processing

2025· article· en· W4416809269 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Memory and Language · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationOffice of Naval ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPredictive codingCoding (social sciences)SentenceSentence processingInformation processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational approaches to prediction in online sentence processing tend to be dominated by computation-level surprisal theory, offering few insights into underlying cognitive mechanisms. Conversely, predictive coding is an algorithmic theory grounded in neuroscience, but it has rarely been employed in the study of language processing, in part because its areas of application have not involved sequential processing. Building on a recently proposed temporal predictive coding model, we present what is to our knowledge the first exploration of sequential predictive coding in broad-coverage online sentence processing. We investigate our model at non-toy scale using naturally occurring language, establishing its cognitive validity via comparison with reading times, and we link measurable aspects of the model to cognitive discussions of mechanism for prediction in language processing. Our results suggest that sequential predictive coding models are a valuable complement to surprisal theory as a route to progress on process-oriented theories of language 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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.292 · 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