MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7154602475 · doi:10.48448/n496-4349

Top-Down Biases for Lexicality and Frequency in Both Monosyllabic and Disyllabic Stimuli: Evidence from Cantonese

2025· other· W7154602475 on OpenAlexaff
Cognitive Science Society 2025, Ka Keung Lee, Stephen Politzer-Ahles

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2025
Typeother
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Response biasSound localizationWord lists by frequencyWord (group theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Also known as the Ganong effect, a lexicality bias effect- i.e., the bias to interpret an ambiguous sound as the phoneme that yields a real word in its context - has been widely replicated. The search for a similar frequency bias effect, on the other hand, has yielded mixed results: In English, a bias has been observed such that listeners tend to interpret an ambiguous sound as the phoneme that yields a higher-frequency word, but this has failed to be replicated in Mandarin. One difference between these studies is the use of monosyllabic vs. disyllabic stimuli. To determine the factors that influence the presence of a bias effect, the present study tested for both frequency and lexicality bias effects using monosyllabic and disyllabic stimuli in Cantonese. Results show that the lexicality and frequency bias effects can be elicited in both monosyllabic and disyllabic stimuli, but the frequency effect is weaker.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.011
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.293 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207