MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078121407 · doi:10.1177/1362361309105659

The role of vision for online control of manual aiming movements in persons with autism spectrum disorders

2009· article· en· W2078121407 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProprioceptionAutismPsychologyAutism spectrum disorderEye movementPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMovement controlCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies suggest motor skills are not entirely spared in individuals with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Previous reports demonstrated that young adults with ASD were able to land accurately on a target despite increased temporal and spatial variability during their movement. This study explored how a group of adolescents and young adults with an ASD used vision and proprioception to land successfully on one of two targets. Participants performed eye movements and/or manual reaching movements, either with or without vision. Although eye movements were executed in a similar timeframe, participants with ASD took longer to plan and execute manual reaching movements. They also exhibited significantly greater variability during eye and hand movements, but were able to land on the target regardless of the vision condition. In general, individuals with autism used vision and proprioception. However, they took considerably more time to perform movements that required greater visual-proprioceptive integration.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.282 · 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