MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994252282 · doi:10.1167/10.8.21

Imperceptibly rapid contrast modulations processed in cortex: Evidence from psychophysics

2010· article· en· W1994252282 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael Falconbridge, A. S. Ware, D. I. A. MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Eye InstituteUniversity of California, San DiegoMcGill University
KeywordsContrast (vision)Visual cortexSpatial frequencyPsychophysicsRefresh rateModulation (music)Visual processingReversingNeuroscienceCommunicationOpticsPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsPerceptionMaterials scienceAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid fluctuations in contrast are common in our modern visual environment. They arise, for example, in a room lit by a fluorescent light, when viewing a CRT computer monitor and when watching a movie in a cinema. As we are unconscious of the rapid changes, it has been assumed that they do not affect the operation of our visual systems. By periodically reversing the contrast of a fixed pattern at a rapid rate we render the pattern itself, as well as the modulations, invisible to observers. We show that exposure to these rapidly contrast-modulated patterns alters the way subsequent stationary patterns are processed; patterns similar to the contrast-modulated pattern require more contrast to be detected than dissimilar patterns. We present evidence that the changes are cortically mediated. Taken together, our findings suggest that cortical stages of the visual system respond to the individual frames of a contrast-reversed sequence, even at rates as high as 160 frames per second.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207