MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007538239 · doi:10.1167/14.10.1427

Spatial integration of orientation-defined texture

2014· article· en· W2007538239 on OpenAlexaff
Gunnar Schmidtmann, Ben J. Jennings, Jason Bell, F. A. A. Kingdom

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurvatureOrientation (vector space)Texture (cosmology)SummationMathematicsSpatial frequencyNoise (video)SIGNAL (programming language)PhysicsGeometryMathematical analysisOpticsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have reported linear summation for Glass patterns from measures of detection thresholds as a function of signal area, and have proposed specialized concentric orientation texture detectors (Wilkinson et al., 1997; cf. Dakin & Bex, 2002). Motivated by these findings and recent results in curvature discrimination showing strong summation of curvature information for circular segments up to 180˚ (semi-circle) (Schmidtmann et al., 2013), we investigated spatial integration for a variety of different orientation-defined textures (circular, radial, spiral, translational) composed of 150 Gabor patches. In a 2AFC, subjects had to detect the texture in a single randomly positioned pie-wedge sector of varying angular extent ranging from 36˚ - 360˚. The signal to noise ratio in that sector was varied, whereas the remaining array contained randomly oriented elements (noise only). Results show that, contrary to previous studies, detection thresholds for all texture types decrease with angular extent following a power-law function with an exponent around -0.5. To investigate the role of spatial uncertainty we fixed the angular position of the sector containing signal elements. This improved performance disproportionately for small sectors, resulting in even weaker summation across angular extent and can therefore not explain any lack of summation. Next we analyzed the correlation between correct responses and clustering of signal elements. Results show that observers are more likely to make correct responses if signal elements are clustered (high density). To summarize, we found that, a) the detection of orientation-defined texture is independent of texture type; b) summation across area was weaker than reported previously and c) summation strength is further reduced by adding spatial certainty. We suggest that detecting local clusters of signal elements might limit the detection of global form in these textures. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2014

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207