Simultaneous Pattern Discriminations by Pigeons Reveal Absence of Mirror-Image and Left-Right Confusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a simultaneous discrimination task, pigeons were first trained with two patterns: one rewarding (A+) and the other unrewarding (B-) that contained the same components (the symbols: c, d, ■ and <) but displayed in a different spatial layout. They were then tested for their choices of patterns: (1) A+ vs. its mirror image (MI); (2) A+ vs. its left-right reversal (LR); (3) MI vs. other layouts (OL) of the symbols; (4) LR vs. OL. In the first two conditions, A+ was chosen over its MI and LR reversal (i.e., no MI or LR confusions were found). In the last two conditions, MI and LR were not chosen over the OL, that is, they were not treated as substitutes for the A+. On the contrary, the OL stimuli were chosen over the transformations of A+. In all cases, the discriminations revealed a failure to confuse the A+ with its transformations, as predicted from work showing that the position of pattern components is important in pattern recognition.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".