MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993110360 · doi:10.3819/ccbr.2008.20007

Spatial Navigation: Spatial Learning in Real and Virtual Environments

2006· article· en· W1993110360 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRIPS architectureSpatial learningCognitive mapSpatial cognitionGeographyFocus (optics)Computer scienceSpatial memoryCognitionData scienceHuman–computer interactionCartographyPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Humans and many non-human animals need to accurately and efficiently navigate from one place to the next in their environment. Over 3,000 years ago the volcanic islands of the Pacific were settled by the people of Polynesia These navigators sailed in craft from Samoa to Hawaii covering an area extending some 4,500 km without the benefits of modern navigational equipment. Errors in the estimation of direction or position during trips to and from the islands in this region could have dire consequences. Some 2,400 years later, European sailors had started mastering oceanic navigation and were probably surprised to discover that people had already traveled to, and were living on, these remote Pacific islands. Today, few humans make such long trips without the benefits of modern navigational tools.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.252 · 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