MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115945237 · doi:10.1002/dev.20055

Multiple sensitive periods in human visual development: Evidence from visually deprived children

2005· review· en· W2115945237 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychobiology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptokinetic reflexPeriod (music)PsychologyAudiologyVisual acuityDevelopmental psychologyOptometryEye movementNeuroscienceOphthalmologyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychophysical studies of children deprived of early visual experience by dense cataracts indicate that there are multiple sensitive periods during which experience can influence visual development. We note three sensitive periods within acuity, each with different developmental time courses: the period of visually-driven normal development, the sensitive period for damage, and the sensitive period for recovery. Moreover, there are different sensitive periods for different aspects of vision. Relative to the period of visually driven normal development, the sensitive period for damage is surprisingly long for acuity, peripheral vision, and asymmetry of optokinetic nystagmus, but surprisingly short for global motion. A comparison of results from unilaterally versus bilaterally deprived children provides insights into the complex nature of interactions between the eyes during normal visual development.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.281 · 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