Detailed Exploration of Face-related Processing in Congenital Prosopagnosia: 1. Behavioral Findings
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
We show that five individuals with congenital prosopagnosia (CP) are impaired at face recognition and discrimination and do not exhibit the normal superiority for upright over inverted faces despite intact visual acuity, low-level vision and intelligence, and in the absence of any obvious neural concomitant. Interestingly, the deficit is not limited to faces: The CP individuals were also impaired at discriminating common objects and novel objects although to a lesser extent than discriminating faces. The perceptual deficit may be attributable to a more fundamental visual processing disorder; the CP individuals exhibited difficulty in deriving global configurations from simple visual stimuli, even with extended exposure duration and considerable perceptual support in the image. Deriving a global configuration from local components is more critical for faces than for other objects, perhaps accounting for the exaggerated deficit in face processing. These findings elucidate the psychological mechanisms underlying CP and support the link between configural and face processing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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