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
Expertise in recognizing facial identity, and, in particular, sensitivity to subtle differences in the spacing among facial features, improves into adolescence. To assess the influence of experience, we tested adults and 8-year-olds with faces differing only in the spacing of facial features. Stimuli were human adult, human 8-year-old, and monkey faces. We show that adults' expertise is shaped by experience: They were 9% more accurate in seeing differences in the spacing of features in upright human faces than in upright monkey faces. Eight-year-olds were 14% less accurate than adults for both human and monkey faces (Experiment 1), and their accuracy for human faces was not higher for children's faces than for adults' faces (Experiment 2). The results indicate that improvements in face recognition after age 8 are not related to experience with human faces and may be related to general improvements in memory or in perception (e.g., hyperacuity and spatial integration).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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