Instead of using a 192-utterance development set, we follow the Kaldi recipe (Povey et al., 2011) and use 400 utterances from the complete test set (disjoint from the core test set) as the validation set.
Sample text:```We use BLEU (up to 4-grams) (Papineni et al., 2002) as evaluation metric, which computes the precision of n-grams in generated summaries with gold-standard abstracts as the reference.```
Sample intent: background
Sample text:```These models are not specified and observe a single phenomenon from different points of view (Maxfield et al., 2002; Parker et al., 2009).```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```While this method is known to be generally reliable, there are some questions about the representativeness of the data used [25].```
Sample intent: background



Sample text:```For example, Kawato et al. (1990) suggested that movement trajectories can be projected using critical via-points through which the trajectory has to pass at a certain time, rather than in terms of the moment-by-moment dynamics of the implemented movement trajectory. Optimal trajectories can then be learnt by applying local optimising principles for getting from one via-point to the next. In this way, impoverished predictions can be used to monitor rich implementations. In the same way, language users might predict particularly crucial aspects of an utterance, but the aspects that they predict will depend on the circumstances. More generally, Meyer & Hagoort question the value of predicting one’s own utterance. They argue that prediction is useful when it is likely to differ from the actual event. This is the case when predicting another person’s behaviour or when the result of one’s action is uncertain (e.g., moving in a strong wind). But they argue that people are confident about their own speech. Meyer & Hagoort admit that they will tend to be less confident in dialogue, and we agree. But more important, we argue that the behaviour of the production implementer is not fully determined by the production command, because the complex processes involved in production are subject to internal (“neural”) noise or priming (i.e., influences that may not be a result of the production command). Assuming that these sources of noise do not necessarily affect forward modelling as well, predicted speech may differ from actual speech. In addition, prediction is useful even if the behaviour is fully predictable, because it allows the actor to plan future behaviour on the basis of the prediction. In fact, we made such a proposal in relation to the order of heavy and light phrases (see sect. 3.1, target article). Hartsuiker claims that our account incorrectly predicts an early competitor effect in Huettig and Hartsuiker (2010). His claim is based on the assumption that Response/Pickering & Garrod: An integrated theory of language production and comprehension```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```The items are internally consistent and reproducible and the questionnaire may therefore be considered to have at least as favourable levels of reliability as clinical scores used to assess outcomes (Koran 1975).```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```Note that in their pioneering paper Calvet and Fisher (2002) proposed the simplified version of the construction of Mannersalo et al (2002).```
Sample intent: method
Sample text:```…posttraining and follow-up was moderate in size after self-study instruction (mean d = −0.57; Martino et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2004; Moyers et al., 2008; Sholomskas et al., 2005) and after didactic workshop training (mean d = −0.55; Baer et al., 2004; Miller et al., 2004; Moyers et al., 2008).```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```For example, Kawato et al. (1990) suggested that movement trajectories can be projected using critical via-points through which the trajectory has to pass at a certain time, rather than in terms of the moment-by-moment dynamics of the implemented movement trajectory. Optimal trajectories can then be learnt by applying local optimising principles for getting from one via-point to the next. In this way, impoverished predictions can be used to monitor rich implementations. In the same way, language users might predict particularly crucial aspects of an utterance, but the aspects that they predict will depend on the circumstances. More generally, Meyer & Hagoort question the value of predicting one’s own utterance. They argue that prediction is useful when it is likely to differ from the actual event. This is the case when predicting another person’s behaviour or when the result of one’s action is uncertain (e.g., moving in a strong wind). But they argue that people are confident about their own speech. Meyer & Hagoort admit that they will tend to be less confident in dialogue, and we agree. But more important, we argue that the behaviour of the production implementer is not fully determined by the production command, because the complex processes involved in production are subject to internal (“neural”) noise or priming (i.e., influences that may not be a result of the production command). Assuming that these sources of noise do not necessarily affect forward modelling as well, predicted speech may differ from actual speech. In addition, prediction is useful even if the behaviour is fully predictable, because it allows the actor to plan future behaviour on the basis of the prediction. In fact, we made such a proposal in relation to the order of heavy and light phrases (see sect. 3.1, target article). Hartsuiker claims that our account incorrectly predicts an early competitor effect in Huettig and Hartsuiker (2010). His claim is based on the assumption that Response/Pickering & Garrod: An integrated theory of language production and comprehension```
Sample intent: method



Sample text:```Our results confi rm previous studies that reached the same conclusion (Boushey et al 1994; Vermeulen et al 2000; Till et al 2005; Marcucci et al 2005).```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```Because previous studies indicated that hexapeptides bind the junction core (29, 32), we tested two junctions, one with an AT-rich core and the other with a GC-rich core (Fig.```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```Following the experimental design proposed in Yannakakis and Hallam (2007c) and Yannakakis et al. (2008) for effectively capturing the level of entertainment, the test-bed game under investigation is played in variants.```
Sample intent: background



Sample text:```5 concentrations were computed for each participant using a hierarchical spatiotemporal model fit with a pragmatic estimation procedure described elsewhere [30,31].```
Sample intent: background



Sample text:```We use BLEU (up to 4-grams) (Papineni et al., 2002) as evaluation metric, which computes the precision of n-grams in generated summaries with gold-standard abstracts as the reference.```
Sample intent: background



Sample text:```The results for veridical recall replicated previous results in the literature (Bal-
lardini et al., 2008; McDermott & Watson, 2001), with the average recall of studied words increas-
ing monotonically as SOA increased.```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```Our heritability result is generally in agreement with the studies of Kien et al. (2008) in Eucalyptus urophylla and Zhao et al. (2014a) in poplar.```
Sample intent: result



Sample text:```The items are internally consistent and reproducible and the questionnaire may therefore be considered to have at least as favourable levels of reliability as clinical scores used to assess outcomes (Koran 1975).```
Sample intent: result