Achromatic Transparency and the Role of Local Contours
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
In this paper we investigate the role of contours and junctions in the perception of single-plane achromatic transparency. In order to measure the accuracy with which observers encode transparency, a six-luminance stimulus was employed in which the figural properties could be easily manipulated. Accuracy was measured by requiring subjects to select (either by the method of adjustment or by using a forced-choice procedure) the luminance that best completed a simulated transparent filter. The X junctions in the stimulus were destroyed or perturbed in three experiments. Simple occlusion of the junction (experiment 1), and perturbation of the orientation of the contours of the filter as they pass through the junction (experiment 3) resulted in small but significant reductions in performance. On the other hand, a sudden change in orientation of the background (material) contours (experiment 2) resulted in a small but significant enhancement of overall performance compared with the control stimulus. In the forced-choice task, reversals in the polarity of contours (as defined by the brightness order of flanking regions) around the junction were shown to effect large changes in subjects' accuracy in processing transparency. The overall results show that X and Psi junctions are indeed salient properties of transparent stimuli. The findings suggest that jagged contours with sudden changes in direction are more likely to be attributed to reflectance (material) changes than to changes due to a transparent filter (or to illumination).
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) | 0.002 | 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