MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Learning to become an expert: reinforcement learning and the acquisition of perceptual expertise

2011· article· en· W938683852 on OpenAlexaff
Olav Krigolson, Lara J. Pierce, Clay B. Holroyd, James W. Tanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurosciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningPerceptionReinforcementArtificial intelligencePerceptual learningHuman–computer interactionPsychologyNeuroscienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

sensitive to processing of feedback) elicited over the frontalcentral region.Only the high learners learned to identify the learnable blobs that resulted in increase in the amplitudes of N250.Most importantly, with more training, the high learners developed the ability to evaluate the correctness of their responses while being less dependent on the external feedback.This was reflected as increase in amplitude of response ERN that preceded the enhancement of N250.In addition, there was a corresponding decrease in feedback ERN.The results suggested that the improvement in the categorization task was preceded by enhancement in the ability to evaluate the correctness of one's responses which reduced the dependence on any external feedback.Interestingly, no such effect was observed for the morph blobs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.342
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.099 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurosciencesSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207