MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112577153 · doi:10.1068/p5002

The Depiction of Car Light Beams in a Child Born Completely Blind

2004· article· en· W2112577153 on OpenAlexaff
Amedeo D’Angiulli, Stefania Maggi

Bibliographic record

VenuePerception · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsLearning PartnershipBC Research (Canada)University of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepictionPsychologyOpticsArtPhysicsVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 12-year-old child (DI) who was completely blind from birth, made a series of tactual (raised-lines) drawings of cars. Among them, there was the depiction of a 'fast car at night' in which DI drew beams of light projecting out of the car. We analyse this drawing, and the preceding ones. We argue that the way in which cars and light beams were depicted by DI cannot be fully and solely explained by graphic imprecision, executive or motor deficiencies, or by rote or verbal learning. Instead, we propose that the most plausible explanation is that DI's depiction of light in a fast car at night reflects the child's naïve knowledge of light propagation, and that this knowledge was gained through perceiving light as radiant heat.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptionSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207