Developmental plasticity of mouse visual acuity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monocular deprivation in mice between postnatal days 19 and 32 has been reported to significantly shift ocular dominance within the binocular region of primary visual cortex; however, it is not known whether visual deprivation in mice during this physiologically defined critical period also results in amblyopia, as it does in other mammals. We addressed this uncertainty by psychophysically assessing in adulthood (postnatal day 70 or older) the grating acuity of normal and monocularly deprived mice, using the Visual Water Task. The visual acuity of mice tested with their nondeprived eyes was equivalent to that of normal mice ( approximately 0.5 cycles/degree); however, acuity measured with eyes monocularly deprived of vision transiently between postnatal days 19 and 32 was reduced by over 30% ( approximately 0.31 cycles/degree). Identical binocular deprivation produced a significant, but smaller, decrease in acuity ( approximately 0.38 cycles/degree). The effects of monocular and binocular deprivation were long lasting and occurred only if visual deprivation occurred between postnatal days 19 and 32. These data indicate that the deleterious effects of early visual deprivation on visual acuity in mice are similar to those reported in other mammals, and together with electrophysiological evidence of ocular dominance plasticity, suggest that the mechanisms of mouse visual plasticity are fundamentally the same as that in other mammals. Therefore, the mouse is probably a good model for investigating the basic cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying visual developmental plasticity and amblyopia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it