MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010422974 · doi:10.1080/09658210802665829

The use of autobiographical knowledge in age estimation

2009· article· en· W2010422974 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

VenueMemory · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsCampion CollegeUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutobiographical memoryPsychologyEvent (particle physics)General knowledgeEpisodic memoryCognitive psychologyPeriod (music)Developmental psychologyCognitionRecall

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Event dates are not directly associated with memories, so the processes by which we maintain a sense of time and sequence in our autobiographical memories is of considerable interest. The present study examined participants' reported age estimation strategies for childhood memories retrieved using a Galton-Crovitz cueing technique. The results indicate that all three categories of autobiographical knowledge in Conway and Pleydell-Pearce's (2000) self-memory system model-lifetime periods, general events, and event-specific details-support temporal inferences. However, participants most frequently used lifetime period knowledge to provide an initial age range, and event-specific knowledge was used to confirm or narrow the range of their estimated age.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.230 · 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