Selectivity as well as sensitivity loss characterizes the cortical spatial frequency deficit in amblyopia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The processing deficit in amblyopia is not restricted to just high spatial frequencies but also involves low-medium spatial frequency processing, for suprathreshold stimuli with a broad orientational bandwidth. This is the case in all three forms of amblyopia; strabismic, anisometropic, and deprivation. Here we use both a random block design and a phase-encoded design to ascertain (1) the extent to which fMRI activation is reduced at low-mid spatial frequencies in different visual areas, (2) how accurately spatial frequency is mapped across the amblyopic cortex. We report a loss of function to suprathreshold low-medium spatial frequency stimuli that involves more than just area V1, suggesting a diffuse loss in spatial frequency processing in a number of different cortical areas. An analysis of the fidelity of the spatial frequency cortical map reveals that many voxels lose their spatial frequency preference when driven by the amblyopic eye, suggesting a broader tuning for spatial frequency for neurons driven by the amblyopic eye within this low-mid spatial frequency range.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".