Spatial learners display enhanced oculomotor performance
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
Attention is important during navigation processes that rely on a cognitive map, as spatial relationships between environmental landmarks need to be selected, encoded, and learned. Spatial learners navigate using this process of cognitive map formation, which relies on the hippocampus. Conversely, response learners memorise a series of actions to navigate, which relies on the caudate nucleus. The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between spatial learning and oculomotor performance. We tested 23 response learners and 23 spatial learners, as determined by the 4-on-8 virtual maze, on an antisaccade task with a gap and emotional visual stimulus manipulation. Spatial learners displayed decreased saccadic reaction time latencies compared to response learners. Performance cost from the gap manipulation was significantly higher in response learners. These results could represent an attentional practice effect through the use of spatial strategies during navigation or a more global increase in cognitive function amongst spatial learners.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it