Visuomotor Memory for Target Location in Near and Far Reaching Spaces
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 authors investigated systematic error associated with endpoints of memory-guided actions performed in near and far reaching spaces. To accomplish that objective, the authors instructed 12 participants to initiate open-loop and memory-guided reaches (0, 2,000, and 5,000 ms of visual delay) from a common start position to remembered midline targets in near (i.e., a backward reach) and far (i.e., a forward reach) reaching spaces. The results indicated that near and far reaches, respectively, over- and undershot veridical target location, and the direction-specific nature of the error was amplified in the memory-guided conditions. The latter finding represents an important aspect of the present research because it suggests that the direction-specific error identified here is related to factors arising within the sensory component of the task rather than mechanical differences in reaching direction. The authors propose that stored target information serving memory guided actions is susceptible to a compression of visual space in memory such that the egocentric distance of a remembered target is underestimated.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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