Dorsal–Ventral Integration in the Recognition of Motion-Defined Unfamiliar Faces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primate visual system is organized into two parallel anatomical pathways, both originating in early visual areas but terminating in posterior parietal or inferior temporal regions. Classically, these two pathways have been thought to subserve spatial vision and visual guided actions (dorsal pathway) and object identification (ventral pathway). However, evidence is accumulating that dorsal visual areas may also represent many aspects of object shape in absence of demands for attention or action. Dorsal visual areas exhibit selectivity for three-dimensional cues of depth and are considered necessary for the extraction of surfaces from depth cues and can carry out cognitive functions with such cues as well. These results suggest that dorsal visual areas may participate in object recognition, but it is unclear to what capacity. Here, we tested whether three-dimensional structure-from-motion (SFM) cues, thought to be computed exclusively by dorsal stream mechanisms, are sufficient to drive complex object recognition. We then tested whether recognition of such stimuli relies on dorsal stream mechanisms alone, or whether dorsal-ventral integration is invoked. Results suggest that such cues are sufficient to drive unfamiliar face recognition in normal participants and that ventral stream areas are necessary for both identification and learning of unfamiliar faces from SFM cues.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".