MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987755316 · doi:10.1167/7.14.18

Feature-based attention modulates the perception of object contours

2007· article· en· W1987755316 on OpenAlexaff
Boge Stojanoski, Matthias Niemeier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionStimulus (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Visual perceptionTask (project management)Object (grammar)PsychologyCognitive psychologyMotion perceptionArtificial intelligenceCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionComputer scienceCommunicationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feature-based attention is known to support perception of visual features associated with early and intermediate visual areas. Here we examined the role of feature-based attention in higher levels of object processing. We used a dual-task design to probe perception of poorly attended contour-defined or motion-defined loops while attention was occupied with congruent or incongruent feature detection tasks. Perception of the unattended task was better when concurrently presented with a congruent stimulus. However, this effect was eliminated when detection of the primary task was made easy suggesting that task-demand in object perception is feature specific. Our results provide evidence for the contribution of feature-based attention to object perception.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207