MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020771674 · doi:10.1037//0882-7974.17.1.7

The effects of encoding task on age-related differences in the functional neuroanatomy of face memory.

2002· article· en· W2020771674 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

VenuePsychology and Aging · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsBaycrest Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyRecognition memoryEncoding (memory)Task (project management)Young adultDevelopmental psychologyDifferential effectsCognitionCognitive psychologyNeuroanatomyFacial recognition systemBrain activity and meditationNeuroscienceAudiologyPattern recognition (psychology)ElectroencephalographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Age-related differences in brain activity mediating face recognition were examined using positron emission tomography. Participants encoded faces using a pleasant-unpleasant judgment, a right-left orientation task, and intentional learning. Scans also were obtained during recognition. Both young and old groups showed signficant effects of encoding task on recognition accuracy, but older adults showed reduced accuracy overall. Increased brain activity in older adults was similar to that seen in young adults during conditions associated with deeper processing, but was reduced during the shallow encoding and recognition conditions. Left prefrontal activity was less in older adults during encoding, but greater during recognition. Differential correlations of brain activity and behavior were found that suggest older adults use unique neural systems to facilitate face memory.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.243 · 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