MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Oculomotor inhibition of return

2011· book· en· W1544655372 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2011
Typebook
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInhibition of returnPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A mechanism referred to as inhibition of return (IOR) was proposed by Michael Posner and colleagues (Posner and Cohen, 1984; Posner et al., 1985) to account for delayed responses to stimuli presented in previously attended regions or on previously attended objects. This increase in response times is intricately linked to the orienting machinery of the oculomotor system and, as such, it was proposed that IOR plays a crucial role in facilitating search behaviour. Properties of IOR that have been identified using a simple cuing paradigm (e.g. IOR can be coded in environmental and object coordinates) are consistent with this functional interpretation. The interaction of IOR with oculomotor phenomena is reviewed with an emphasis on how orienting behaviour is modulated by IOR. Studies using a wide variety of methods demonstrate that fixations that return gaze to a recently fixated region (even when these refixations occur more frequently than chance) suffer a temporal cost, no doubt because whatever processes encourages the return of attention must overcome the inhibitory traces left behind by prior orienting.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.169 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it