MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032654709 · doi:10.1167/14.10.561

Visual masking with faces: Interruption of a trailing mask at critical SOA does not reduce masking.

2014· article· en· W2032654709 on OpenAlexaff
Marwan Daar, H. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulus onset asynchronyBackward maskingMasking (illustration)Stimulus (psychology)PerceptComputer scienceAudiologyPsychologyPerceptionMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern theories of visual masking incorporate mechanisms that interefere with the consolidation of a target pattern into a conscious percept, and propose that feedback may be involved (Enns, 2004; Breitmeyer, 2007). To explore this, we conducted a series of experiments where we measured face identity discrimination thresholds in the central visual field under various masking conditions with face masks. In our first experiment (n=4), we examined masking as a function of SOA (stimulus onset asynchrony) in a standard backward masking paradigm, and compared it to common onset masking with a trailing mask. In this latter condition, the target and mask appeared at the same time, and after 33 ms, the target disappeared while the mask remained visible. In the SOA condition, peak masking occurred at an SOA of 58 ms, and in the trailing condition, masking equivalent to that of the peak SOA condition was found with a trailing mask duration of 58 ms and did not change as the trail was increased up to 600 ms. In Experiment 2, we tested seven observers in a modified trailing condition in which we briefly removed the masking stimulus for varying intervals, centered around the 58 ms point found to be critical in the previous SOA condition. When compared to an uninterrupted trail, we found no reduction in masking, with "mask gaps" as wide as 58 ms (p = 0.95). These results show that the effect of a trailing mask cannot be explained only by its presence at the critical SOA. We explore our findings in the framework of reverberant feedback loops. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2014

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207