Vision Impairment: Science, art and lived experience
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is it like to go blind? 350 million people around the world live with severe vision impairment, ranging from those who can see a couple of letters on a sight chart to those who perceive no light at all. In this book we meet some of them, including artists, poets, scientists, architects, politicians, broadcasters and musicians. Together, we discuss every stage of life with vision impairment – from childhood and education to dating, employment and ageing – as well as the portrayal of blind people in literature and film, the use of technology by people with vision impairment, and the psychological effects of losing vision. Vision Impairment also reviews the major causes of sight loss today and shows the effect of these diseases on visual function. It surveys new and emerging treatments for serious eye diseases and explores what it is like to have vision restored after decades of being blind. Based on Michael Crossland’s extensive work in children’s and adults’ low vision clinics, and his 20 years of research into vision impairment, the book blends individual stories, key research findings and the most recent scientific discoveries to present an informative yet optimistic overview of living with sight loss.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it