Learning, Retention and Generalization of a Mirror Tracing Skill in Alzheimer's Disease
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
The present study examined the ability of 12 patients with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and 12 age- and education-matched normal control (NC) subjects to learn and retain the visuomotor skills necessary to efficiently trace a pattern (e.g., a 4- or 6-pointed star) seen only in mirror-reversed view. Those AD (N=6) and NC (N=7) subjects who were able to initially perform the basic mirror tracing task did not differ significantly in initial level of performance, learning over trials, retention of the skill over a 30-min delay interval, and generalization of the skill to a new figure or to the opposite direction of tracing. The AD patients who were unable to initially perform the mirror tracing task were significantly worse than those who could perform the task on several neuropsychological measures sensitive to deficits in problem solving and executive functions, but not on tests of global cognitive decline, memory, language, or visuoperceptual functioning. These results indicate that acquisition and retention of a complex visuomotor skill can proceed normally in the early stages of AD in those individuals who can initially perform the basic task, and that inability to perform the basic task may be related to the frontal lobe dysfunction that is often prominent in the disorder.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it