MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990989105 · doi:10.1017/s0140525x19001468

A sensorimotor alternative to coding is possible

2019· letter· en· W2990989105 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Cisek

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral and Brain Sciences · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphorCoding (social sciences)Cognitive scienceComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Neural systemNeurosciencePsychologyCognitive psychologyBiologySociologyPhilosophyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If we abandon the coding metaphor in favor of models of the full behavioral loop, we need a way to dissect that loop into understandable pieces. I suggest that evolutionary data provide a solution. We can subdivide behavior into parallel sensorimotor subsystems by following the phylogenetic history of how those systems differentiated and specialized during our evolution, leading to promising ways of re-interpreting neural activity within the context of its pragmatic role in mediating interaction.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral and Brain SciencesSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207