MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051853382 · doi:10.1037//0735-7044.116.3.443

Visuospatial impairments in aged canines (Canis familiaris): The role of cognitive-behavioral flexibility.

2002· article· en· W2051853382 on OpenAlexaff
Alan Chan, Pria Nippak, Heather Murphey, Candace J Ikeda-Douglas, Bruce A. Muggenburg, Elizabeth Head, Carl W. Cotman, Norton W. Milgram

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Neuroscience · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough Hospital
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsCognitive flexibilityPsychologyWorking memoryCanisBeagleDevelopmental psychologyCognitionFlexibility (engineering)Young adultAudiologyNeuroscienceMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study used a novel delayed nonmatching-to-position task to compare visuospatial learning and memory in young and aged beagle dogs (Canis familiaris). The task used 3, rather than 2, spatial locations, which markedly increased difficulty. There were striking age differences in acquisition. Most of the aged canines did not learn the task, and those that did showed impaired learning when compared with the young canines. The aged canines also showed reduced maximal working memory capacity compared with the young canines. Analysis of the response patterns of individual canines indicated that the deficits were related to the use of ineffective strategies and inflexibility in strategy modification.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations105
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral NeuroscienceSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207