README.md

---
dataset_info:
  features:
  - name: question
    dtype: string
  - name: subtest
    dtype: string
  splits:
  - name: train
    num_bytes: 1463
    num_examples: 20
  download_size: 2343
  dataset_size: 1463
configs:
- config_name: default
  data_files:
  - split: train
    path: data/train-*
license: mit
task_categories:
- text-generation
- text-classification
language:
- en
tags:
- aphasia
pretty_name: Text Aphasia Battery (TAB)
size_categories:
- n<1K
---

# Text Aphasia Battery (TAB)

The **Text Aphasia Battery (TAB)** is a modified subset of the [Quick Aphasia Battery (QAB)](https://aphasialab.org/qab/) designed to assess aphasic symptoms in environments where input and output modalities are restricted to text. TAB is especially useful for large-scale identification of aphasic features in applications such as corpus studies and evaluations of large language models (LLMs). **Note:** TAB is not a replacement for the QAB or other clinical diagnostic tools.

---

## Overview

TAB consists of **four subtests** that evaluate different aspects of language function:

1. **Connected Text**
2. **Word Comprehension**
3. **Sentence Comprehension**
4. **Repetition**

Each subtest comes with specific instructions and scoring criteria, aimed at detecting various aphasic markers.

---

## Subtests

### 1. Connected Text

- **Objective:**  
  Evaluate fluency, grammaticality, and coherence of speech.

- **Instructions:**  
  Respond to the following prompts in 3–5 full sentences:
  - "Tell me about the best trip you ever took."
  - "Describe a happy childhood memory."
  - "Tell me about your first job."
  - "What do you like about where you live?"
  - "Describe what is happening in the following scene: The boy is pushing the girl."

- **Scoring:**  
  Uses adapted non-motor APROCSA features (see **Notes on Evaluation**).

---

### 2. Word Comprehension

- **Objective:**  
  Evaluate lexical-semantic processing and selection among competing meanings.

- **Instructions:**  
  Elicit responses **verbatim** for the following:
  - "Which one is an animal: ‘lion’ or ‘drum’?"
  - "Which object is typically used to make music: ‘violin’ or ‘giraffe’?"
  - "Which item is usually worn on the feet: ‘boot’ or ‘boat’?"
  - "Which object is used for cutting: ‘knife’ or ‘kite’?"
  - "Which one is a large mammal with a long neck: ‘giraffe’ or ‘horse’?"

- **Scoring:**  
  Responses are scored in a binary fashion (correct/incorrect). Incorrect selections may indicate deficits in semantic processing.

---

### 3. Sentence Comprehension

- **Objective:**  
  Evaluate syntactic processing, comprehension of passive structures, and logical reasoning.

- **Instructions:**  
  Elicit responses **verbatim** for the following:
  - "Are babies watched by babysitters?" (Expected: **Yes**)
  - "Do you cut the grass with an axe?" (Expected: **No**)
  - "If you’re about to leave, have you left yet?" (Expected: **No**)
  - "Are witnesses questioned by police?" (Expected: **Yes**)
  - "If I was at the park when you arrived, did I get there first?" (Expected: **Yes**)

- **Scoring:**  
  Delayed or incorrect responses may indicate difficulties with syntactic processing, handling of negation, or confusion with passive constructions.

---

### 4. Repetition

- **Objective:**  
  Evaluate morphosyntactic integrity.

- **Instructions:**  
  Elicit responses **verbatim** for the following:
  - "Please repeat exactly: house."
  - "Please repeat exactly: breakfast."
  - "Please repeat exactly: catastrophe."
  - "Please repeat exactly: The sun rises in the East."
  - "Please repeat exactly: The ambitious journalist discovered where we’d be going."

- **Scoring:**  
  Check for exact reproduction. Errors (e.g., phonemic substitutions, deletions, or distortions) indicate issues with morphosyntactic processing.

---

## Notes on Evaluation

TAB scoring is based on **binary pass/fail** criteria according to predefined aphasic markers. The evaluation focuses on the following linguistic features:

- **Anomia:** Word-finding failures or circumlocutions.
- **Paraphasias:**  
  - *Semantic Paraphasias:* Substitution of one content word for another.  
  - *Phonemic Paraphasias:* Errors in sound production (substitution, insertion, deletion, or transposition).
- **Agrammatism:** Omission of function words or morphemes.
- **Paragrammatism:** Incorrect or inappropriate grammatical structures.
- **Empty Speech:** Overuse of vague, nonspecific words.
- **Repetition/Reading Errors:** Deletions, insertions, or distortions.

For **Connected Text**, each response should be evaluated for the presence (1) or absence (0) of the following APROCSA features:

- Anomia
- Abandoned utterances
- Empty speech
- Semantic paraphasias
- Phonemic paraphasias (evaluated at token-level in models)
- Neologisms
- Jargon
- Perseverations
- Stereotypies and automatisms
- Short and simplified utterances
- Omission of bound morphemes
- Omission of function words
- Paragrammatism
- Retracing
- False starts
- Conduite d’approche
- Meaning unclear
- Off-topic
- Overall communication impairment

---

## Automatic Identification Prompt

The TAB is built for automatic evaluation using in-context LLM prompting. The system processes a transcript and produces a JSON file with each linguistic feature as a key and its value set to **1** (feature present) or **0** (feature not present).

### Instructions

- **Input:**  
  A transcript passage.

- **Processing:**  
  Analyze the transcript according to the definitions and examples below.

- **Output:**  
  A JSON file that includes **every one** of the following features as keys:

  - Anomia
  - Abandoned utterances
  - Empty speech
  - Semantic paraphasias
  - Phonemic paraphasias
  - Neologisms
  - Jargon
  - Perseverations
  - Stereotypies and automatisms
  - Short and simplified utterances
  - Omission of bound morphemes
  - Omission of function words
  - Paragrammatism
  - False starts
  - Retracing
  - Conduite d’approche
  - Meaning unclear
  - Off-topic
  - Overall communication impairment

### Output Format

Your JSON output **must** include each feature as a key with its corresponding value (0 or 1). Do **not** include any additional keys or extraneous information.

---

### Examples

#### Example 1

**Hypothetical Passage:**

> "I was trying to tell you about my day but I just I mean I wanted to say something about the store I go store I wanted a pen I mean pencil The ball the ball the ball kept bouncing and I just stopped you know I keep saying dammit dammit dammit all the time"

**Associated JSON Output:**

```json
{
  "Anomia": 1,
  "Abandoned utterances": 1,
  "Empty speech": 0,
  "Semantic paraphasias": 0,
  "Phonemic paraphasias": 0,
  "Neologisms": 0,
  "Jargon": 0,
  "Perseverations": 1,
  "Stereotypies and automatisms": 1,
  "Short and simplified utterances": 1,
  "Omission of bound morphemes": 1,
  "Omission of function words": 1,
  "Paragrammatism": 0,
  "False starts": 0,
  "Retracing": 0,
  "Conduite d’approche": 0,
  "Meaning unclear": 0,
  "Off-topic": 0,
  "Overall communication impairment": 1
}
```

#### Example 2

**Hypothetical Passage:**

> "I want to go to the store to buy a blorf You know I keep trying to say it but I say I want to go to the st store I want a pa pen I mean pencil I dont know what im trying to say It all seems not right"

**Associated JSON Output:**

```json
{
  "Anomia": 1,
  "Abandoned utterances": 0,
  "Empty speech": 0,
  "Semantic paraphasias": 0,
  "Phonemic paraphasias": 0,
  "Neologisms": 1,
  "Jargon": 0,
  "Perseverations": 0,
  "Stereotypies and automatisms": 0,
  "Short and simplified utterances": 0,
  "Omission of bound morphemes": 0,
  "Omission of function words": 0,
  "Paragrammatism": 0,
  "False starts": 1,
  "Retracing": 0,
  "Conduite d’approche": 1,
  "Meaning unclear": 1,
  "Off-topic": 0,
  "Overall communication impairment": 1
}
```

> **Important:** Your analysis must strictly adhere to the definitions and examples provided. No additional keys or information should be included in the output JSON.

---

## Sources

1. **Wilson SM, Eriksson DK, Schneck SM, Lucanie JM.**  
   *A quick aphasia battery for efficient, reliable, and multidimensional assessment of language function.*  
   **PLoS One** 2018; 13(2): e0192773.

2. **Casilio M, Rising K, Beeson PM, Bunton K, Wilson SM.**  
   *Auditory-perceptual rating of connected speech in aphasia.*  
   **Am J Speech Lang Pathol** 2019; 28: 550-68.

*Definitions and examples for the automatic identification prompt are adapted from Table 1 of Casilio et al. (2019).*

---

## Disclaimer

The TAB is intended **for research and evaluation purposes only**. It should not be used as a clinical diagnostic tool or a substitute for professional evaluation.

---

## Contributing

Contributions are welcome! If you wish to improve or extend TAB:
1. Fork the repository.
2. Create your feature branch.
3. Commit your changes.
4. Open a pull request.

---

## License

the TAB is released openly under the MIT license