Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36598905›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Random forests, sound symbolism and Pokémon evolution.

Alexander James Kilpatrick, Aleksandra Ćwiek, Shigeto Kawahara

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
16.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexander James KilpatrickInternational Communication, Nagoya University of Commerce and Business, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-3134-3797
Aleksandra ĆwiekDepartment Leibniz-Zentrum Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin, Germany.
Shigeto KawaharaInstitute of Cultural and Linguistic Studies, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan.
Keio University · JPLeibniz-Centre General Linguistics · DENagoya University of Commerce and Business · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study constructs machine learning algorithms that are trained to classify samples using sound symbolism, and then it reports on an experiment designed to measure their understanding against human participants. Random forests are trained using the names of Pokémon, which are fictional video game characters, and their evolutionary status. Pokémon undergo evolution when certain in-game conditions are met. Evolution changes the appearance, abilities, and names of Pokémon. In the first experiment, we train three random forests using the sounds that make up the names of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean Pokémon to classify Pokémon into pre-evolution and post-evolution categories. We then train a fourth random forest using the results of an elicitation experiment whereby Japanese participants named previously unseen Pokémon. In Experiment 2, we reproduce those random forests with name length as a feature and compare the performance of the random forests against humans in a classification experiment whereby Japanese participants classified the names elicited in Experiment 1 into pre-and post-evolution categories. Experiment 2 reveals an issue pertaining to overfitting in Experiment 1 which we resolve using a novel cross-validation method. The results show that the random forests are efficient learners of systematic sound-meaning correspondence patterns and can classify samples with greater accuracy than the human participants.

Indexed as

Random ForestVideo GamesAlgorithmsHumansSoundSymbolism

Identifiers

PMID36598905
PMCPMC9812336
OpenAlexW4313545546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.