Distinguish resource units, model scores, coverage rates, and status labels.
The public methodology describes the site’s LaSAn framework. Read the current reference when interpreting a score; the definitions and data coverage matter more than the apparent precision of a chart.
The described framework organizes 68 resource units across lexical resources, grammar, corpora, audio and visual material, education, digital tools, standardisation, and cultural knowledge. These framework categories are not simply another name for the Observatory’s six broad display areas.
A resource unit has its own scale and reference ceiling. The methodology describes logarithmic scales for some counts, linear scales for some coverage measures, and milestones for discrete states. Consequently, doubling a raw count does not necessarily double its score.
| Measure | Meaning in the stated framework |
|---|---|
| Language Resource Index (LRI) | Average of the resource-unit scores |
| Resource Coverage Rate (RCR) | Share of units reaching the framework’s Functional threshold |
| Critical Gap Count (CGC) | Count of below-threshold units identified as dependencies for other work |
These are definitions from the project’s model, not a claim that a single number completely describes the language or its speakers.
At the checked methodology version, six resource units are mapped from available corpus measures, while the remaining units are described as placeholders with zero scores until more data is available. That distinction affects interpretation: a zero can reflect an unpopulated part of this model rather than independently verified absence of all real-world resources.
Consult the current methodology for updated mappings. Do not silently treat a framework’s full list of categories as evidence that each category has equally complete observations.
A model label follows the model’s thresholds and inputs. Read it with the score definition and source coverage. It should not be presented as an unrelated external classification or a complete account of everyday transmission, cultural use, and speaker knowledge.
For public discussion, state which measure and framework you mean. Continue with corpus and evidence or what-if simulations, preserving the same care about inputs and assumptions.
