Perceptual Learning: Policy Insights From Basic Research to Real-World Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perceptual learning is the process by which experience alters how incoming sensory information is processed by the brain to give rise to behavior—it is critical for how humans educate children, train experts, treat diseases, and promote health and well-being throughout the lifespan. Knowledge of perceptual learning requires basic and applied research in humans and nonhuman animal models, which informs strategic targets for advancing applications. Commercial products to induce perceptual learning are proliferating rapidly with limited regulation (e.g., for rehabilitation), while at the same time basic science is increasingly restricted by changing regulations (such as new granting-agency definitions of clinical trials). Realizing the full potential of perceptual learning requires balancing basic and translational science to advance new knowledge, while serving and protecting consumers. Reforms can promote open, accessible, and representative research, and the translation of this research to applications across different sectors of society.
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 | 0.050 | 0.156 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.027 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".