Center-surround effects on orientation discrimination with visual noise stimuli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physiological and behavioural evidence suggests that responses to a target stimulus can be modulated by context. In the orientation domain, parallel elements in the surround can suppress responses to a center target, whereas orthogonal elements have less or no effect. We investigated the influence of contextual orientation information using a stimulus in which the amount of oriented signal was varied independent of contrast. Oriented elements within the pattern were drawn with a particular grey level for a limited spatial extent, and then randomly switched to a new grey level. Oriented centers (2 deg) were presented in the context of either a parallel or orthogonal surround. The subjects' task was to discriminate oriented centers from unoriented noise centers in a 2IFC task. With a uniform grey surround, only 12% orientation signal was required for accurate discrimination. With a strong parallel surround, twice as much oriented signal was required. This effect was reduced when the orientation strength of the surround signal was reduced or when a gap separated the center and surround. Thresholds were also elevated with an unoriented noise surround. When the surround signal was orthogonal, thresholds were not different from thresholds with a uniform grey surround. These results are consistent with previous physiological and behavioural results that suggest orientation information is pooled across a local spatial region in an orientation-specific manner.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".