The impact of central sparing on the word-length effect in hemianopia
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
Studies suggest that a word-length effect of up to 160 ms/letter distinguishes hemianopic dyslexia from pure alexia. However, partial preservation of central vision is common in right hemianopia, but its effects on single-word reading are unknown. Eighteen healthy subjects read single words with a gaze-contingent right hemianopia simulation that varied the degree of central sparing. Mean reading onset time declined with small degrees of central sparing, but the word-length effect did not decrease until sparing exceeded 3.15°. We next evaluated the effects of font size. Effects of central sparing were constant when expressed in number of letters, with a decline in word-length effect beginning as sparing approached 4 letters. We conclude that the effects of central sparing on mean reading onset time and the word-length effect are distinct. We provide diagnostic word-length criteria for discriminating between pure alexia and hemianopic dyslexia with various degrees of central sparing.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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