MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090154998 · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.052

Impaired concept acquisition in children with ASD: beyond the enhanced perceptual processing hypothesis

2010· article· en· W2090154998 on OpenAlexaff
Ljiljana Radenović

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionSimilarity (geometry)Cognitive psychologyPsychologyCognitive scienceFoundation (evidence)Basis (linear algebra)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plaisted's theory of enhanced perceptual processing (2001), developed to explain impaired concept acquisition in children with ASD, presupposes that perception of similarity is the basis of concept acquisition. Hence, it is grounded in the similarity-based theory of concepts. This paper argues that the concept of similarity is a poor foundation for a viable theory of concept acquisition. Consequently, it argues for an account for how the child gets to see similarities in the course of development, instead of this being understood as the basis of concept development. This paper suggests that such an account will require a closer look at the development of multimodal perception and joint attention.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia - Social and Behavioral SciencesSame topicChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207