On the Centrality and Significance of Stimulus-Encoding Deficit in Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased latency of stimulus encoding is presented as a central deficit in schizophrenia cognition. Encoding, here, entails the internal representation of presenting stimuli in a format facilitating their implementation in other cognitive processes, such as those taking place in working memory. Historical roots of suspected encoding debility in schizophrenia briefly are reviewed, and its singular empirical robustness is described. More recently, this deficit has been subjected to stochastic mathematical modeling, resulting in its decomposition into discrete cognitive functions. A nonmathematical exposition of this account is provided, and substantial behavioral study support is illustrated. Implications for clinical assessment of individuals and of treatment regimens, with respect to encoding-related cognitive efficiency, are noted. Finally, because stochastic dynamic trajectories of process duration are modeled, times of measurement interest, complementing neuroanatomical regions of interest, become available for enhanced temporal navigation of event-related fMRI. Results from recent implementations of such process-defined events are described.
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 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".