MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sparing of sensitivity to biological motion but not of global motion after early visual deprivation

2012· article· en· W2119238581 on OpenAlexaff
Bat‐Sheva Hadad, Daphne Maurer, Terri L. Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiological motionMotion (physics)PsychologyDorsumMotion perceptionVisual perceptionPerceptionNeuroscienceCommunicationAudiologyComputer visionComputer scienceBiologyAnatomyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients deprived of visual experience during infancy by dense bilateral congenital cataracts later show marked deficits in the perception of global motion (dorsal visual stream) and global form (ventral visual stream). We expected that they would also show marked deficits in sensitivity to biological motion, which is normally processed in the superior temporal sulcus via input from both the dorsal and ventral streams. When tested on the same day for sensitivity to biological motion and to global motion at two speeds (4 and 18° s(-1)), patients, as expected, displayed a large deficit in processing global motion at both speeds. Surprisingly, they performed normally in discriminating biological motion from scrambled displays, tolerating as much noise as their age-matched controls. Networks bypassing damaged portions of the dorsal and the ventral streams must mediate the spared sensitivity to biological motion after early visual deprivation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations104
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental ScienceSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207