The cortical deficit in humans with strabismic amblyopia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To further our understanding of the cortical deficit in strabismic amblyopia, we measured, compared and mapped functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) activation between the fixing and fellow amblyopic eyes of ten strabismic amblyopes. Of specific concern was whether the function of any visual area was spared in strabismic amblyopia, as recently suggested by both positron emission tomography (PET) and fMRI studies, and whether there was a close relationship between the fMRI response and known psychophysical deficits. To answer these questions we measured the psychophysical deficit in each subject and used stimuli whose relationship to the psychophysical deficit was known. We observed that stimuli that were well within the amblyopic passband did produce reduced fMRI activation, even in visual area V1. This suggests that V1 is anomalous in amblyopia. A similar level of reduction was observed in V2. In two subjects, we found that stimuli outside the amblyopic passband produced activation in visual area V3A. We did not find a close relationship between the fMRI response reduction in amblyopia and either of the known psychophysical deficits even though the fMRI response reduction in amblyopia did covary with stimulus spatial frequency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".