Portable eyetracking-based assessment of memory decline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Preferential viewing of novel stimuli in the Visual Paired Comparison task has provided a useful marker of memory and medial temporal lobe function. We created a portable version of the VPC (P-VPC) and contrasted P-VPC metrics against the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in healthy adults, to assess the validity and reliability of the P-VPC as an indicator of memory function across age. A supplementary case series was conducted with individuals diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias, to provide a preliminary illustration of the P-VPC's use as a measure in clinical populations. METHOD: Participants (n = 207) were tested using the P-VPC. Individuals were familiarized with a set of objects, which were each presented alongside a novel object in the test phase. Novelty viewing scores were compared to MoCA scores to index concurrent validity. Item analyses were conducted as a test of internal reliability of the P-VPC. A complementary clinical case series was conducted with AD (n = 4) and dementia (n = 5) participants, who were tested using the P-VPC and further compared to healthy age-matched participants. RESULTS: Preferential viewing decreased with age in healthy participants, and was positively correlated with MoCA scores. Compared to the MoCA, P-VPC scores did not differ based on education and/or whether English was spoken as the native language. Item analyses revealed acceptable internal consistency. P-VPC viewing percentiles of healthy participants were modeled as a function of age, and illustrated that individuals of the clinical case series diagnosed with AD scored in below-average percentiles, while those with dementia did not score below-average. CONCLUSION: Good concurrent validity and acceptable internal reliability were observed, and P-VPC scores were not confounded by education or language experience. Low performance was observed in individuals with clinically diagnosed AD, suggesting that the P-VPC may be a potential tool for screening memory decline.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".