Age-related differences in face processing: A meta-analysis of three functional neuroimaging experiments.
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
Differences between young and old adults in brain activity, measured with positron emission tomography, were examined during three face processing experiments: episodic memory, working memory, and degraded face perception. Each experiment contained an easy face matching condition and a more difficult processing condition. Young adults showed greater activity in bilateral prefrontal cortex during the memory tasks, compared to face matching, but no difference in prefrontal activity between degraded and nondegraded perception. Older adults, on the other hand, had greater prefrontal activity in both memory and degraded perceptual tasks compared to matching. This suggests that increased prefrontal activity is task-specific in young adults, but, in old adults, is a more general response to increased cognitive effort or need for resources. These data are consistent with the dedifferentiation hypothesis of aging, and suggest a possible neural mechanism for this dedifferentiation, such that dependence on prefrontal activity across a greater number of tasks could also increase the amount of covariance across these tasks.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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