MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069218205 · doi:10.1167/9.12.18

Preservation of shape discrimination in aging

2009· article· en· W2069218205 on OpenAlexaff
Claudine Habak, F. Wilkinson, Hugh R. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)LuminanceTexture (cosmology)Function (biology)Shape analysis (program analysis)Object (grammar)NeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePsychologyBiologyImage (mathematics)Evolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The representation of objects becomes increasingly complex at higher levels of the human visual cortex. Shapes of intermediate complexity serve as a step in the representation of such intricate constructs. Healthy aging has adverse effects on cortical function, and we sought to determine the effects of age on the efficacy and speed of neuronal mechanisms underlying shape processing. Using deformed circular shapes, we probe object representation by varying the characteristics that define the shape and by assessing lateral interactions among shapes. Results indicate that performance declines with age for shapes defined by texture but not by luminance. However, there is no age-related slowing for the processing of shape, and probes of lateral interactions reveal spared function for complex shape combinations. Findings suggest that the effect of age on shapes defined by texture arises from lower stages of visual processing, and that the representation of shape combinations is spared because of its robust nature.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207