Enhancing visuospatial map learning through action on cellphones
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 visuospatial learning of a map on cellphone displays was examined. The spatial knowledge of human participants was assessed after they had learned the relative positions of London Underground stations on a map via passive, marginally active, or active exploration. Following learning, the participants were required to answer questions in relation to the spatial representation and distribution of the stations on the map. Performances were compared between conditions involving (1) without auditory cues versus continuous auditory cues; (2) without auditory cues versus noncontinuous auditory cues; and (3) continuous auditory cues versus noncontinuous auditory cues. Results showed that the participants perfomed better following active and marginally-active explorations, as compared to purely passive learning. These results also suggest that under specific conditions (i.e., continuous sound with extremely fast tempo) there is no benefit to spatial abilities from active exploration over passive observation; while continuous sound with moderate to fast tempo is effective for simple actions (i.e., key press).
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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