ArticleScientific data2025
Wordsworth: A generative word dataset for comparison of speech representations in humans and neural networks.
Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Wordsworth: A generative word dataset for comparison of speech representations in humans and neural networks.Scientific data · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Speech perception is fundamental for human communication, but its neural basis is not well understood. Furthermore, while modern neural networks (NNs) can accurately recognize speech, whether they effectively model human speech processing remains unclear. Here, we introduce Wordsworth, a dataset designed to facilitate comparisons of speech representations between artificial and biological NNs. We synthesised 1,200 tokens for each of 84 monosyllabic words while controlling for acoustic parameters such as amplitude, duration, and background noise, thus encouraging the use of phonetic features known to be important for speech perception. Human listening experiments showed that Wordsworth tokens are intelligible. Additional experiments using convolutional NNs showed (i) that Wordsworth tokens were recognizable and (ii) that error patterns could be at least partially explained by acoustic phonetics. The control with which tokens were created permits end users to manipulate them in whatever ways might be useful for their purposes. Finally, a subset of tokens specifically for human neuroscience experiments was also created, with precise and known distributions of amplitude, onset, and offset times.
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.