Unaffected smooth pursuit but impaired motion perception in monocularly enucleated observers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper was to study the characteristics of closed-loop smooth pursuit eye movements of 15 unilaterally eye enucleated individuals and 18 age-matched controls and to compare them to their performance in two tests of motion perception: relative motion and motion coherence. The relative motion test used a brief (150 ms) small stimulus with a continuously present fixation target to preclude pursuit eye movements. The duration of the motion coherence trials was 1s, which allowed a brief pursuit of the stimuli. Smooth pursuit data were obtained with a step-ramp procedure. Controls were tested both monocularly and binocularly. The data showed worse performance by the enucleated observers in the relative motion task but no statistically significant differences in motion coherence between the two groups. On the other hand, the smooth pursuit gain of the enucleated participants was as good as that of controls for whom we found no binocular advantage. The data show that enucleated observers do not exhibit deficits in the afferent or sensory pathways or in the efferent or motor pathways of the steady-state smooth pursuit system even though their visual processing of motion is impaired.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".