Reorienting in Virtual 3D Environments: Do Adult Humans Use Principal Axes, Medial Axes or Local Geometry?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies have shown that animals, including humans, use the geometric properties of environments to orient. It has been proposed that orientation is accomplished primarily by encoding the principal axes (i.e., global geometry) of an environment. However, recent research has shown that animals use local information such as wall length and corner angles as well as local shape parameters (i.e., medial axes) to orient. The goal of the current study was to determine whether adult humans reorient according to global geometry based on principal axes or whether reliance is on local geometry such as wall length and sense information or medial axes. Using a virtual environment task, participants were trained to select a response box located at one of two geometrically identical corners within a featureless rectangular-shaped environment. Participants were subsequently tested in a transformed L-shaped environment that allowed for a dissociation of strategies based on principal axes, medial axes and local geometry. Results showed that participants relied primarily on a medial axes strategy to reorient in the L-shaped test environment. Importantly, the search behaviour of participants could not be explained by a principal axes-based strategy.
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 | 0.001 |
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".