ArticlePloS one2024
Utility of Kolmogorov complexity measures: Analysis of L2 groups and L1 backgrounds.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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
- A corpus-based analysis of noun modifiers in L2 writing: The respective impact of L2 proficiency and L1 background.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The proliferation of automated syntactic complexity tools allowed the analysis of larger amounts of learner writing. However, existing tools tend to be language-specific or depend on segmenting learner production into native-based units of analysis. This study examined the utility of a language-general and unsupervised linguistic complexity metric: Kolmogorov complexity in discriminating between L2 proficiency levels within several languages (Czech, German, Italian, English) and across various L1 backgrounds (N = 10) using two large CEFR-rater learner corpora. Kolmogorov complexity was measured at three levels: syntax, morphology, and overall linguistic complexity. Pairwise comparisons indicated that all Kolmogorov complexity measures discriminated among the proficiency levels within the L2s. L1-based variation in complexity was also observed. Distinct syntactic and morphological complexity patterns were found when L2 English writings were analyzed across versus within L1 backgrounds. These results indicate that Kolmogorov complexity could serve as a valuable metric in L2 writing research due to its cross-linguistic flexibility and holistic nature.
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.