ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Kolmogorov complexity metrics in assessing L2 proficiency: An information-theoretic approach.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring information density in interlanguage through entropy analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Based on 774 argumentative writings produced by Chinese English as a foreign language (EFL) learners, this study examined the extent to which Kolmogorov complexity metrics can distinguish the proficiency levels of beginner, lower-intermediate, and upper-intermediate second language (L2) English learners. Kolmogorov complexity metric is a holistic information-theoretic approach, which measures three facets of linguistic complexity, i.e., overall, syntactic, and morphological complexity simultaneously. To assess its validity in distinguishing L2 proficiency, Kolmogorov complexity metric is compared with traditional syntactic and morphological complexity metrics as well as fine-grained syntactic complexity metrics. Results showed that Kolmogorov overall and syntactic complexity could significantly distinguish any adjacent pair of L2 levels, serving as the best separators explored in the present study. Neither Kolmogorov morphological complexity nor other complexity metrics at both the syntactic and morphological levels can distinguish between all pairs of adjacent levels. Results of correlation analysis showed that Kolmogorov syntactic complexity was not or weakly correlated with all the fine-grained syntactic complexity metrics, indicating that they may address distinct linguistic features and can complement each other to better predict different proficiency levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.