Backward Pattern Masking of Familiar and Unfamiliar Materials in Disabled and Normal Readers
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
A discrimination task involving backward pattern masking was designed to investigate differences between disabled and normal readers in text perception. Masking was observed for both groups with unfamiliar Japanese materials, but disabled readers were less sensitive in discriminating than were normal readers. The same result was obtained with Roman letters, despite the high familiarity of materials to both groups, and with nonwords and words. A significant interaction between group and stimulus onset asynchrony, indicating that disabled readers recovered from masking at a slower rate than normal readers, was found only with nonwords. Visual factors alone could not have mediated group differences. A subgroup of disabled readers, formed on the basis of susceptiblity to masking, showed evidence of a deficit in rate of visual processing. The results are likely due to differences in the quality of representations of visual information used in discrimination and in word recognition.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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