MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023746174 · doi:10.1167/10.7.568

The effects of aging and stimulus duration on face identification accuracy with differing viewpoints

2010· article· en· W2023746174 on OpenAlexaff
Anind K. Dey, M. V. Pachai, Patrick Bennett, Allison B. Sekuler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)ViewpointsPsychologyAudiologyAge groupsDevelopmental psychologyArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Cognitive psychologyComputer scienceMedicinePhysicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Habak, Wilkinson and Wilson (2008, Vision Res, 48(1), 9-15) reported that face identification accuracy was lower in older subjects than younger subjects, especially for faces presented at different viewpoints. In addition, they found that identification accuracy for faces presented in different viewpoints improved in younger subjects, but not older subjects, as stimulus duration increased from 500 to 1000 ms. This result led Habak et al. to propose that the accumulation of information used to refine neural representations saturates earlier in the older visual system than in the younger visual system. However, Habak et al. used artificially constructed stimuli that differed in outer contour and hair in addition to the geometry of internal features, and may not have been discriminated on the basis of facial features per se. We therefore investigated the effect of stimulus duration in older (n=8) and younger (n=8) observers using pictures of faces that differed in viewpoint but had identical outer contours and no hair, forcing subjects to base identification on internal facial features. Observers viewed a high-contrast target face for 250ms, 500ms, 1000ms, or 2000ms followed by a 10-face choice response. Faces in the response window were presented in fronto-parallel view; target faces were presented at one of several oblique viewpoints. A repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant main effects of age (p<0.001) and duration (p<0.0001), but the age x duration interaction was not significant (p=0.28). Moreover, contrary to Habak et al, we found significant linear trends in both younger (p<0.05) and older (p<0.001) observers, and performance did not reach an asymptote in either group, even with durations up to 2000 ms. Thus, although older observers performed worse than younger observers, both groups accumulated stimulus information across time at similar rates, calling into question the neural saturation hypothesis as a general explanation of age-related face perception deficits.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207