Pivots for pointing: Visually-monitored pointing has higher arm elevations than pointing blindfolded.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Observers pointing to a target viewed directly may elevate their fingertip close to the line of sight. However, pointing blindfolded, after viewing the target, they may pivot lower, from the shoulder, aligning the arm with the target as if reaching to the target. Indeed, in Experiment 1 participants elevated their arms more in visually monitored than blindfolded pointing. In Experiment 2, pointing to a visible target they elevated a short pointer more than a long one, raising its tip to the line of sight. In Experiment 3, the Experimenter aligned the participant's arm with the target. Participants judged they were pointing below a visually monitored target. In Experiment 4, participants viewing another person pointing, eyes-open or eyes-closed, judged the target was aligned with the pointing arm. In Experiment 5, participants viewed their arm and the target via a mirror and posed their arm so that it was aligned with the target. Arm elevation was higher in pointing directly.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".