MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900162953 · doi:10.1101/466870

Sources of path integration error in young and aging humans

2018· preprint· en· W2900162953 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matthias Stangl, Ingmar Kanitscheider, Martin Riemer, Ila Fiete, Thomas Wolbers

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungSimons FoundationHoward Hughes Medical InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPath integrationNoise (video)Path (computing)IntegratorComputer scienceNumerical integrationPosition (finance)ComputationTracking (education)MathematicsAlgorithmPsychologyArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsMathematical analysisEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Path integration is a vital function in navigation: it enables the continuous tracking of one’s position in space by integrating self-motion cues. Path integration abilities vary across individuals but tend to deteriorate in old age. The specific causes of path integration errors, however, remain poorly characterized. Here, we combined tests of path integration performance with a novel analysis based on the Langevin diffusion equation, which allowed us to decompose errors into distinct causes that can corrupt path integration computations. Across age groups, the dominant errors were due to noise and a bias in speed estimation. Noise-driven errors accumulated with travel distance not elapsed time, suggesting that the dominant noise originates in the velocity input rather than within the integrator. Age-related declines were traced primarily to a growth in this unbiased noise. Together, these findings shed light on the contributors to path integration error and the mechanisms underlying age-related navigational deficits.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207