Plasticity of fixation in patients with central vision loss
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
The aim of this study was to explore the plasticity of fixation in patients with central vision loss. Most of these patients use preferred retinal loci (PRLs) in the healthy eccentric part of the retina to fixate, but fixation stability and retinal location are not always optimal for best visual performance. This study examined whether fixation stability and a new PRL location can be trained and whether these changes in ocular motor control transfer into better reading performance. Six patients with age-related macular degeneration participated in the study. Fixation stability measurements, microperimetry, and auditory biofeedback training were performed with the MP-1 microperimeter. The auditory biofeedback was used during five 1-h long training sessions to improve fixation and relocate the PRL. Fixation location and stability were recorded while viewing four different targets: a cross, a letter, a word, and a nine-cycle radial grating. Visual acuity was assessed with the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart and reading performance with the MNRead test. The results showed that all patients developed a new PRL in an optimal location for reading, and they were able to use it consistently while viewing different targets. Fixation stability improved 53% after training. Learning transferred to the old PRL even though fixation stability at this location was not trained. All these improvements in ocular motor control translated into better reading performance: reading speed improved 38% and reading acuity and critical print size gained two lines. We conclude that the ability of the ocular motor system to fixate is flexible in patients with central vision loss: a new PRL can be trained, fixation stability can be improved, and learning transfers to an untrained location. These gains in ocular motor control result in better visual performance. This property can be successfully used to optimize the residual vision of patients with central vision loss.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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