H-Huang/complex_word_identification huggingface dataset:
Reviewing admins will usually defer to the blocking admin in a sockpuppetry-based block , especially if the sock account has minimal edits .
Target word: Reviewing — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: admins — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: defer — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 5 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.35)
Target word: sockpuppetry-based — judged complex by 6 of 10 native annotators and 4 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.5)
Target word: blocking — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: admin — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: sockpuppetry-based block — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 4 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.3)
Target word: sock account — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: block — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: sock — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: minimal — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: account — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: minimal edits — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: edits — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
ACF Fiorentina , commonly referred to as simply Fiorentina , is a professional Italian football club from Florence , Tuscany .
Target word: ACF — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: ACF Fiorentina — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: referred — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 2 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.25)
Target word: Fiorentina — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: commonly — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Fiorentina — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: simply — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: professional — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 3 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.25)
Target word: Italian — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: football — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: club — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Florence — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Tuscany — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Fiorentina have won two Italian Championships , in 1955-56 and again in 1968-69 , as well as winning six Coppa Italia trophies and one Italian Super Cup .
Target word: Championships — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 2 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.15)
Target word: Fiorentina — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: won — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Italian — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Coppa — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: winning — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Coppa Italia — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.15)
Target word: trophies — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 3 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.3)
Target word: Italia — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Italian — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Super — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Cup — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Fiorentina are known widely by the nickname Viola , a reference to their distinctive purple colors .
Target word: Fiorentina — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: widely — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 4 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.25)
Target word: nickname — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 4 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.35)
Target word: reference — judged complex by 5 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.25)
Target word: Viola — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: distinctive — judged complex by 9 of 10 native annotators and 5 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.7)
Target word: purple — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: colors — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
A1 Grand Prix ( A1GP ) was a ` single make ' open-wheel auto racing series .
Target word: Grand Prix — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: A1 — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Grand — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: single make — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 3 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.2)
Target word: Prix — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: A1GP — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: single — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: open-wheel — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 6 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.45)
Target word: make — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: series — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: auto — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: racing — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
It was unique in its field in that competitors solely represented their nation as opposed to themselves or a team , the usual format in most formula racing series .
Target word: unique — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.2)
Target word: competitors — judged complex by 6 of 10 native annotators and 3 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.45)
Target word: field — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: solely — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 6 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.4)
Target word: represented — judged complex by 4 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.25)
Target word: opposed — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: nation — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: usual format — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: team — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: usual — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: format — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.15)
Target word: formula — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: formula racing — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: formula racing series — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: racing — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: series — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
The nation-based A1GP concept was founded by Sheikh Maktoum Hasher Maktoum Al Maktoum of Dubai , initially in 2003 .
Target word: nation-based — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 3 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.2)
Target word: concept — judged complex by 4 of 10 native annotators and 2 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.3)
Target word: A1GP — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Maktoum — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: founded — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Sheikh — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: initially — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: Hasher — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Maktoum — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Al — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Maktoum — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Dubai — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
The spectrum of the companion GD 165B was very red and enigmatic , showing none of the features expected of a low-mass red dwarf star .
Target word: spectrum — judged complex by 10 of 10 native annotators and 10 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 1.0)
Target word: companion — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.2)
Target word: enigmatic — judged complex by 10 of 10 native annotators and 10 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 1.0)
Target word: GD — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: red — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: features — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: showing — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: expected — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: low-mass — judged complex by 5 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.3)
Target word: low-mass red dwarf star — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: red dwarf — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: red — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: red dwarf star — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: dwarf — judged complex by 4 of 10 native annotators and 5 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.45)
Target word: dwarf star — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 2 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: star — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
The difference between a very-low-mass brown dwarf and a giant planet ( ~ 13 Jupiter masses ) has been recently debated .
Target word: very-low-mass — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: difference — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: very-low-mass brown dwarf — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: brown dwarf — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: brown — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: dwarf — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: planet — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: giant — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: debated — judged complex by 4 of 10 native annotators and 4 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.4)
Target word: Jupiter — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: masses — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: recently — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Early theories concerning the nature of the lowest-mass stars and the hydrogen-burning limit suggested that a Population I object with a mass less than 0.07 solar masses or a Population II object less than 0.09 solar masses would never go through normal stellar evolution and would become a completely degenerate star ( Kumar 1963 ) .
Target word: theories — judged complex by 5 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.3)
Target word: Early — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: theories concerning — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: concerning — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: lowest-mass — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: nature — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: hydrogen-burning — judged complex by 4 of 10 native annotators and 3 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.35)
Target word: stars — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: hydrogen-burning limit — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: suggested — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: limit — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Population I object — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Population — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: solar masses — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: object — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: mass — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: solar — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Population — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: masses — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: solar masses — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: II — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Early theories concerning the nature of the lowest-mass stars and the hydrogen-burning limit suggested that a Population I object with a mass less than 0.07 solar masses or a Population II object less than 0.09 solar masses would never go through normal stellar evolution and would become a completely degenerate star ( Kumar 1963 ) .
Target word: object — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: solar — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: normal stellar evolution — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: masses — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: normal — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: stellar — judged complex by 3 of 10 native annotators and 5 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.4)
Target word: stellar evolution — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.15)
Target word: evolution — judged complex by 2 of 10 native annotators and 2 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.2)
Target word: degenerate — judged complex by 8 of 10 native annotators and 6 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.7)
Target word: completely — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: degenerate star — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: star — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Kumar — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
True stars burn their lithium within a little over 100 Myr , whereas brown dwarfs ( which can , confusingly , have temperatures and luminosities similar to true stars ) will not .
Target word: lithium — judged complex by 5 of 10 native annotators and 2 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.35)
Target word: True — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: stars — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: burn — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: Myr — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 1 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: whereas — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.05)
Target word: brown dwarfs — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 2 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.1)
Target word: brown — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: confusingly — judged complex by 1 of 10 native annotators and 4 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.25)
Target word: dwarfs — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: luminosities — judged complex by 10 of 10 native annotators and 10 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 1.0)
Target word: temperatures — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: similar — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: true — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)
Target word: stars — judged complex by 0 of 10 native annotators and 0 of 10 non-native annotators (probability complex: 0.0)