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
We review our recent behavioural and imaging studies testing the consequences of congenital blindness on the chemical senses in comparison with the condition of anosmia. We found that congenitally blind (CB) subjects have increased sensitivity for orthonasal odorants and recruit their visually deprived occipital cortex to process orthonasal olfactory stimuli. In sharp contrast, CB perform less well than sighted controls in taste and retronasal olfaction, i.e. when processing chemicals inside the mouth. Interestingly, CB do not recruit their occipital cortex to process taste stimuli. In contrast to these findings in blindness, congenital anosmia is associated with lower taste and trigeminal sensitivity, accompanied by weaker activations within the 'flavour network' upon exposure to such stimuli. We conclude that functional adaptations to congenital anosmia or blindness are quite distinct, such that CB can train their exteroceptive chemical senses and recruit normally visual cortical areas to process chemical information from the surrounding environment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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