Neural representations of stimulus category membership across modalities: A systematic review
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
This registration is the protocol of a systematic review under the working title “Neural representations of stimulus category membership across modalities: A systematic review.” This report is not an update of any previous systematic review. This report is registered at https://osf.io/4kda2/. Author Contacts: Anthony Cruz (Corresponding Author): acruz27@uwo.ca John Paul Minda, PhD: jpminda@uwo.ca Western Interdisciplinary Research Building, 1151 Richmond Street, London, ON N6A 3K7, Room 5158 Both authors contributed to the search strategy and analytic plan of this review. Any deviations from this protocol, as well as their motivations, will be documented and published as supplementary material alongside the review. Important deviations will be discussed in the review article itself. This review is supported by the University of Western Ontario, which provides subscriptions to academic databases and to Covidence. This institution has played no role in developing this protocol. This registration was developed using the PRISMA-P checklist.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.207 | 0.156 |
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