Alcohol Does Not Affect Dark Adaptation or Luminance Increment Thresholds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: It has been proposed that alcohol might induce within the retina a state akin to dark adaptation. However, the evidence to support this proposal is quite indirect. Another possibility is that alcohol might affect retinal gain control rather than sensitivity. To investigate these proposals psychophysically, we measured dark adaptation functions and increment thresholds with the increment threshold procedure in individuals with moderate blood alcohol concentrations (BACs). METHOD: Individuals were tested under both alcohol and no-alcohol conditions (BAC approximately .08%). In Experiment 1, thresholds for the detection of a parafoveal target were measured over a 25-minute period following a 3-minute bleach in six males. In Experiment 2, the cone dark adaptation function of four males was examined in more detail for a foveal target following bleaching at three different levels. In Experiment 3, we measured the thresholds of nine men for a small target superimposed on a background field that varied over 4 log units in luminance. RESULTS: We found no effects of alcohol on either the rod or the cone portion of the dark adaptation curve or on increment thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these data indicate that moderate alcohol ingestion does not affect the recovery of visual sensitivity in the dark nor does it affect gain control at the retinal level.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".