Applying an exemplar model to the serial reaction-time task: Anticipating from experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a serial reaction time (SRT) task in which participants identified the location of a target by pressing a key mapped to the location. The location of successive targets was determined by the rules of a grammar, and we varied the redundancy of the grammar. Increasing both practice and the redundancy of the grammar reduced response time, but the participants were unable to describe the grammar. Such results are usually discussed as examples of implicit learning. Instead, we treat performance in terms of retrieval from a multitrace memory. In our account, after each trial, participants store a trace comprising the current stimulus, the response associated with it, and the context provided by the immediately preceding response. When a target is presented, it is used as a prompt to retrieve the response mapped to it. As participants practise the task, the redundancy of the series helps point to the correct response and, thereby, speeds retrieval of the response. The model captured performance in the experiment and in classic SRT studies from the literature. Its success shows that the SRT task can be understood in terms of retrieval from memory without implying implicit learning.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".