Local Visual Energy Mechanisms Revealed by Detection of Global Patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A central goal of visual neuroscience is to relate the selectivity of individual neurons to perceptual judgments, such as detection of a visual pattern at low contrast or in noise. Since neurons in early areas of visual cortex carry information only about a local patch of the image, detection of global patterns must entail spatial pooling over many such neurons. Physiological methods provide access to local detection mechanisms at the single-neuron level but do not reveal how neural responses are combined to determine the perceptual decision. Behavioral methods provide access to perceptual judgments of a global stimulus but typically do not reveal the selectivity of the individual neurons underlying detection. Here we show how the existence of a nonlinearity in spatial pooling does allow properties of these early mechanisms to be estimated from behavioral responses to global stimuli. As an example, we consider detection of large-field sinusoidal gratings in noise. Based on human behavioral data, we estimate the length and width tuning of the local detection mechanisms and show that it is roughly consistent with the tuning of individual neurons in primary visual cortex of primate. We also show that a local energy model of pooling based on these estimated receptive fields is much more predictive of human judgments than competing models, such as probability summation. In addition to revealing underlying properties of early detection and spatial integration mechanisms in human cortex, our findings open a window on new methods for relating system-level perceptual judgments to neuron-level processing.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".