Expressive grammar is evaluated using a sentence completion task and assesses the ability to produce a variety of specific grammatical morphemes: nominal, adjectival, and verbal inflexion, irregular plurals, prepositions, passive structure, and pronominal clitics.
The performance of grammar classifiers was evaluated using the Leave‐One‐Out and 4‐fold Cross‐Validation schemes (LOOCV and 4‐fold CV, respectively) and on an independent test set.
Instances of the form nodangle (shape_i*pfunc suchthat pfunc_filter) for were used in Janssen et al. (2011) for all four grammars to evaluate the effect of different treatments of dangling bases on the shape probabilities.
The quality of the grammar classifiers was primarily evaluated in terms of Area Under ROC curves.
That the lie is tangential to some skills the test evaluates — grammar, syntax — does not sanitize it.
The dynamic tools parse the call trace of the process to check that it belongs to the grammar language and evaluate the assertions.
Multiple grammar classifiers, combined single grammars and best single grammars according to 4‐fold CV were evaluated (Table 4).
The best model derived from the grammar is then quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated and compared.
Narratives were evaluated in terms of syntactic complexity, story grammar complexity, and use of landscape of consciousness elements.
Students were evaluated not only on reading and writing, but on spelling, grammar and punctuation.
To achieve this goal, a hybrid style quantification methodology – a mixture of Fourier decomposition, eye tracker, and shape grammar – was created to evaluate similarities, visual significance, and combinations of 19 car design elements.
