Spatial integration of orientation-defined texture
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
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it