Effects of Image Background on Spatial-Frequency Thresholds for Face Recognition
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A great deal of work has been devoted to the question of which spatial frequencies, if any, are optimal for various visual tasks, such as face and object recognition. However, to date these studies have all been carried out with stimuli set against a uniform background. It is possible that this type of stimulus does not produce ecologically valid results. The natural world in which visual tasks normally take place involves a great deal of luminance variation and distracting visual structure, which may alter the spatial frequencies necessary for a task. We conducted two experiments that examined the effects of image background on the spatial-frequency thresholds (50% maximum of a low-pass or high-pass Butterworth filter) for face recognition by the psychophysical methods of adjustment and constant stimuli. In both experiments we found no significant difference in spatial-frequency thresholds between uniform-grey backgrounds and natural-scene backgrounds, and only minor differences between uniform-grey backgrounds and fractal noise backgrounds. This suggests that results obtained with uniform backgrounds are ecologically valid and that background effects, if they exist, are small.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it