The influence of visual ability on learning and memory performance in 13 strains of mice
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
We calculated visual ability in 13 strains of mice (129SI/Sv1mJ, A/J, AKR/J, BALB/cByJ, C3H/HeJ, C57BL/6J, CAST/EiJ, DBA/2J, FVB/NJ, MOLF/EiJ, SJL/J, SM/J, and SPRET/EiJ) on visual detection, pattern discrimination, and visual acuity and tested these and other mice of the same strains in a behavioral test battery that evaluated visuo-spatial learning and memory, conditioned odor preference, and motor learning. Strain differences in visual acuity accounted for a significant proportion of the variance between strains in measures of learning and memory in the Morris water maze. Strain differences in motor learning performance were not influenced by visual ability. Conditioned odor preference was enhanced in mice with visual defects. These results indicate that visual ability must be accounted for when testing for strain differences in learning and memory in mice because differences in performance in many tasks may be due to visual deficits rather than differences in higher order cognitive functions. These results have significant implications for the search for the neural and genetic basis of learning and memory in mice.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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