Living with One Eye: Plasticity in Visual and Auditory Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When we look at our environment, we immediately detect and recognize they objects, buildings, and people surrounding us. Our perception of fine detail, lines, edges, color, movement, and depth are all important for building up representations of these objects, scenes, and people. This processing occurs rapidly and is achieved effortlessly by the visual system as we take in the world with both eyes. Imagine what it might be like to not have vision through two eyes – to be completely blind. We would have to use our remaining intact sensory systems to their fullest capacity in order to interact with the world. Our senses of touch, taste, smell, and hearing would become significantly more important to allow us to connect with and understand our world. Now instead, consider what it might be like to lose vision in only one eye. With one completely nonfunctional eye and one intact eye, our visual system would still receive light input through the intact remaining eye. So, one might ask, how could having only one eye affect our ability to see? From a systems point of view, the physical light input to our visual system would be reduced by half compared to the intact binocular visual system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".