Effect of Dichoptic Adaptation on Frequency-Doubling Perimetry
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
BACKGROUND: In frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry, the second eye tested has reduced sensitivity. We investigated the cause of this sensitivity reduction. METHODS: Contrast sensitivity was measured for frequency doubling (0.25 cpd, 25 Hz) and nonflickering (4 cpd) gratings, arranged similarly to the targets in the FDT perimeter (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY, and Humphrey Instruments, San Leandro, CA). Various test orders were examined. RESULTS: Frequency-doubling (FD) sensitivity was reduced (0.15 log) in the second eye. A similar reduction occurred when first and second eye gratings were oriented orthogonally, suggesting that dichoptic contrast adaptation was not the cause. FD sensitivity was little affected after testing with nonflickering gratings, suggesting that fatigue effects were small. Sensitivity was reduced when testing was performed after 5 min of opaque occlusion. The use of a translucent occluder eliminated the reduction in sensitivity in the second eye. CONCLUSION: We confirm the presence of reduced sensitivity in the second eye tested with FD perimetry and find that it is caused by delayed light adaptation post-occlusion.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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