The 2024 Richardson Lecture: Prosopagnosia – A Classic Neurologic Deficit Meets the Modern Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acquired prosopagnosia is a rare disorder, but it serves as a model for impairments in expert-level visual processing. This review discusses five key observations made over the past 30 years. First, there are variants, an apperceptive type linked to damage to the inferior occipitotemporal cortex and an amnestic type associated with anterior temporal lesions, both either right or bilateral. Second, these variants are clustered in syndromes with other perceptual deficits, the apperceptive type with field defects, dyschromatopsia and topographagnosia, and the amnestic type with topographagnosia and the auditory disorders of phonagnosia and acquired amusia. Third, extensive testing often shows additional problems with recognizing exemplars of other objects, especially when degrees of expertise are taken into account. Fourth, the prosopagnosic impairment does not affect all facial information. For example, the perception of expression and lip-reading likely depends on other neural substrates than those for processing facial identity. Last, face perception in prosopagnosia is not immutable but can improve with extensive training, though as yet this does not represent a cure for the condition. Continuing work with neural networks and animal models will enhance our understanding of this intriguing condition and what it tells us about how our brains process vision.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
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".