Dynamic Visual Noise Does Not Affect Memory for Fonts
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
Dynamic visual noise (DVN) selectively impairs memory for some types of stimuli (e.g., colors, textures, concrete words), but not for others (e.g., matrices, Chinese characters, simple shapes). According to the image definition hypothesis, the key difference is whether the stimulus leads to images that are ill-defined or well-defined. The former will be affected because the addition of noise quickly reduces the usefulness of the image in supplying information about the item's identity. The image definition hypothesis predicts that fonts should lead to ill-defined images and therefore should be affected by DVN, and although three previous studies appear to show this result, they lack a key control condition and report only proportion correct. Two experiments reassessed whether DVN affects memory for fonts, but, unlike the previous studies, both included a static visual noise condition and both were analyzed using signal detection measures. There was no evidence that DVN affected memory for font information, thus disconfirming a prediction of the original version of image definition hypothesis. We suggest a revised version that focuses on redintegration can explain the results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.006 |
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