Modulation of the Material-Weight Illusion in objects made of more than one material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge about the material properties of objects is essential for successful manual interactions. Vision can provide useful information about features such as weight or friction even before interaction, allowing us to prepare the action appropriately, e.g. adjusting initial forces applied to an object when lifting it. But visual information can also alter multisensory perception of object properties during interaction. When violated, visually-inferred expectations can result in perceptual illusions such as the material-weight illusion (MWI). In this illusion, an object that appears to be made of a low-weight material (e.g., polystyrene) feels heavier than an equally-weighted object of a heavier-looking material (e.g., wood). However, objects are often made of more than one material. Thus, in the present study, we investigated the perceived heaviness of symmetrical objects consisting of two halves, which appeared to be made of different materials: polystyrene, wood, or stone. The true mass of these bipartite objects was identical (400g) and evenly distributed around their geometric centre. Thus, the objects and their halves were visually distinct, but identical in terms of their weight and mass distribution. Participants were asked to lift the objects by a small handle attached centrally, while forces and torques were recorded. Additionally, they were asked to report the perceived weight of both halves of the objects. The visual appearance did indeed alter perceived heaviness. Although estimates of heavier and lighter portions of the objects converged after lifting the objects, the heavier-looking materials in our bipartite objects were still perceived as heavier than the lighter-looking materials. Again, prior expectations appear to affect the perception, but in a direction opposite to that of the MWI. Despite the effects of the visual appearance on perceived heaviness, no corresponding effects were observed on forces or torques. 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".