MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028254463

El tratamiento de la pronunciación en los libros de texto de nivel b1 y su valoración de acuerdo con los principios establecidos por el MCERL

2014· article· es· W7028254463 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuee_Buah · 2014
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Portrait
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En este artículo se pretende analizar cómo se trata la enseñanza de la pronunciación en los libros de texto de nivel B1/B1+ para, a partir de ese análisis, establecer una serie de conclusiones sobre cómo se debería enseñar de acuerdo con los principios establecidos por el Marco Común Europeo de Referencia para las Lenguas MCERL (Consejo de Europa, 2001). Nos centraremos en definir y describir el papel asignado a la pronunciación en el MCERL prestando atención al nivel B1 o B1+, nivel de los contenidos de inglés de Bachillerato y nivel que se le exige a los alumnos universitarios para la obtención de un título universitario en el estado español. Así, valoraremos la forma en la que distintos libros de texto han encauzado la enseñanza de la pronunciación y si presumiblemente las actividades propuestas resultan útiles para alcanzar un determinado nivel en este campo.

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)0.002
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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.264 · 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