MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235452059 · doi:10.1167/12.9.1364

Sparing of coarse stereopsis in children with amblyopia

2012· article· en· W4235452059 on OpenAlexaff
Deborah Giaschi, S. Narasimhan, Ryan Lo, C J Lyons, Jane Gardiner, Maryam Aroichane, Laurie M. Wilcox

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStereopsisStereoscopic acuityOptometryDepth perceptionVergence (optics)StereoscopyStrabismusArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer sciencePsychologyOphthalmologyMedicineNeurosciencePerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is widely recognized that stereoscopic depth percepts result from small retinal disparities within Panum’s fusional area (fine stereopsis). Less recognized is the fact that reliable depth information is also provided by large disparities that cannot be fused (coarse stereopsis). The role of coarse stereopsis in vision is not well understood, but we hypothesize that it develops early in life and is used to guide vergence eye movements that are necessary for the development of fine stereopsis. This is supported by our recent finding that coarse stereopsis is mature by age 4 when fine stereopsis is still developing. Here we test the possibility that the early development of coarse stereopsis makes it resilient to the factors that cause amblyopia. We compared performance in children with strabismic or anisometropic amblyopia and age-matched control children (5-12 years) on computerized tests of fine and coarse stereopsis. Stereoscopic stimuli were presented using liquid crystal shutter glasses. The observer’s task was to indicate whether a cartoon character was nearer or farther away than a zero-disparity fixation marker. We assessed perceived depth for a set of fine (0.02, 0.08, 0.17, 0.33, 0.67, 1.0 degrees) and a set of coarse (2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 degrees) crossed and uncrossed disparities. Accuracy increased with disparity in the fine range for both groups. Children with amblyopia performed significantly worse than control children at fine disparities, as predicted by their performance on the Randot Preschool Stereoacuity Test (>200 arc sec). Accuracy was constant at approximately 65% across all disparities in the coarse range for both groups. These findings suggest that coarse stereopsis may be spared when fine stereopsis is disrupted by early visual deprivation. This residual binocular function has important clinical implications, given the movement towards treating amblyopia as a disorder of binocular processing. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2012

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207