MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1452007484 · doi:10.1167/15.12.679

From eye to face: support for neural inhibition in holistic processing

2015· article· en· W1452007484 on OpenAlexaff
Roxane J. Itier, Karisa Parkington

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFovealFixation (population genetics)Eye movementEye trackingComputer scienceCommunicationPsychologyNeuroscienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceBiologyOphthalmologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The N170 is an early face-sensitive ERP component that has been shown to be sensitive to face configuration disruptions but also to eyes presented in isolation. The Lateral Inhibition Face Template and Eye Detector (LIFTED – Nemrodov et al., 2014) model proposes that the N170 reflects both the activity of an eye detector and holistic processing of the face; holistic processing would be achieved through the inhibition of neurons coding foveal information by neurons coding parafoveal information. Here we investigated this possible inhibition mechanism by monitoring the variations of the N170 to the presentation of facial stimuli ranging from an isolated eye to a full face, encompassing all the intermediate stages of configuration disruption where the rest of the facial features were added one by one (e.g. eye with nose, eye with mouth, eye with nose and mouth etc.). Fixation was always enforced on one or the other eye using an eye-tracker. The N170 was largest for the isolated eye condition and decreased substantially with the sole addition of the face outline. The progressive addition of the other facial features linearly reduced its amplitude which was smallest for the full face. Similar reductions in latency were found with a remarkable 30-40ms decrease in latency between the isolated eye and the full face conditions. Variations in amplitude and latency reductions were seen between hemispheres as a function of which eye was fixated. Results overall support the idea of an inhibition process that depends on the type of features situated in parafovea and their distance from the fixated eye, with the face outline as a major contributor to holistic face processing. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2015

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207