MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

What Is a Preferred Retinal Locus?

2023· review· en· W4328052419 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Vision Science · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonocularRetinalBinocular visionOptometryLocus (genetics)PsychologyNeuroscienceComputer scienceMedicineComputer visionOphthalmologyBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review examines the concept of the preferred retinal locus (PRL) in patients with macular diseases. Considering monocular and binocular viewing, we ( a) explain how to identify the PRL and discuss the pitfalls associated with its measurement, ( b) review the current hypotheses for PRL development, ( c) assess whether the PRL is the new reference point of the ocular motor system, and discuss ( d) the functional and ( e) the clinical implications of the PRL. We conclude that the current definition of the PRL is probably incomplete and should incorporate the need to evaluate the PRL in the framework of binocular viewing. We emphasize the need for more research.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.381 · 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