REVIEW 1 cited by
Application of Lexical Features Towards Improvement of Filipino Readability Identification of Children's Literature
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Proper identification of grade levels of children's reading materials is an important step towards effective learning. Recent studies in readability assessment for the English domain applied modern approaches in natural language processing (NLP) such as machine learning (ML) techniques to automate the process. There is also a need to extract the correct linguistic features when modeling readability formulas. In the context of the Filipino language, limited work has been done [1, 2], especially in considering the language's lexical complexity as main features. In this paper, we explore the use of lexical features towards improving the development of readability identification of children's books written in Filipino. Results show that combining lexical features (LEX) consisting of type-token ratio, lexical density, lexical variation, foreign word count with traditional features (TRAD) used by previous works such as sentence length, average syllable length, polysyllabic words, word, sentence, and phrase counts increased the performance of readability models by almost a 5% margin (from 42% to 47.2%). Further analysis and ranking of the most important features were shown to identify which features contribute the most in terms of reading complexity.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
It's How You Ask: Gender-Associated Linguistic Bias in LLMs
Women-associated phrasing in LLM prompts triggers measurably plainer, shorter responses, and the trigger is encoded in early model layers rather than in explicit gender markers.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.