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
Paradoxically, recent increases in the physical size and resolution of displays have introduced new challenges for interface design over a wide field of view. Since the visual system processes information very differently depending on whether it is presented in the central or in the peripheral regions of the visual field, the effectiveness of our ability to process information at large visual angles is largely unknown. Whether processing capability varies significantly in the periphery of computer displays is an unsettled question. An answer to this question could guide the development of best practices for the spatial arrangement of information in large displays. In our experiment, we show that information presented in the left visual field is processed faster and more accurately than in the right visual field. This difference suggests that more important information and data requiring immediate attention or rapid processing should preferably be presented in the left visual field. We discuss potential applications of our results using the dashboard interface with two examples: real-time stock market monitoring and the arrangement of gadgets on personalized pages.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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