Atypical responses to faces during binocular rivalry in early glaucoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Glaucoma is a progressive optic neuropathy that damages retinal ganglion cells and a neurodegenerative disease as it affects neural structures throughout the brain. In this study, we examined binocular rivalry responses in patients with early glaucoma in order to probe the function of stimulus-specific cortical areas involved in face perception. Methods: Participants included 14 individuals (10 females, mean age 65 ± 7 years) with early pre-perimetric glaucoma and 14 age-matched healthy controls (7 females, mean age 59 ± 11 years). The 2 groups were equivalent in visual acuity and stereo-acuity. Three binocular rivalry stimulus pairs were used: (1) real face/house, (2) synthetic face/noise patch, and (3) synthetic face/spiral. For each stimulus pair, the images were matched in size and contrast level; they were viewed dichotically, and presented centrally and eccentrically at 3 degrees in the right (RH) and in the left hemifield (LH), respectively. The outcome measures were rivalry rate (i.e., perceptual switches/min) and time of exclusive dominance of each stimulus. Results: For the face/house stimulus pair, rivalry rate of the glaucoma group (11 ± 6 switches/min) was significantly lower than that of the control group (15 ± 5 switches/min), but only in the LH location. The face dominated longer than the house in the LH for both groups. Likewise, for the synthetic face/noise patch stimulus pair, rivalry rate of the glaucoma group (11 ± 6 switches/min) was lower than that of the control group (16 ± 7 switches/min) in the LH, but the difference failed to reach significance. Interestingly, the mixed percept dominated less in glaucoma than in the control group. For the synthetic face/spiral stimulus pair, the glaucoma group had lower rivalry rate at all 3 stimulus locations. Conclusion: This study reveals atypical responses to faces during binocular rivalry in patients with early glaucoma. The results may be suggestive of early neurodegeneration affecting stimulus-specific neural structures involved in face processing starting in the pre-perimetric phase of the disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".