MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035107776 · doi:10.1068/p5727

Independent Processing of Form, Colour, and Texture in Object Perception

2008· article· en· W2035107776 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePerception · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTexture (cosmology)PerceptionTask (project management)Property (philosophy)Object (grammar)Categorical variableCognitive psychologyContrast (vision)PsychologyArtificial intelligenceSurface (topology)Computer scienceCommunicationPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsImage (mathematics)GeometryMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most investigations of object recognition have focused on the form rather than the material properties of objects. Nevertheless, knowledge of the material properties of an object (via its surface cues) can provide important information about that object's identity. In this study, we used Garner's speeded-classification task to explore whether or not the processing of form and the processing of surface properties are independent. In experiment 1, participants made length and width classifications in an initial form task. Participants were unable to ignore length while making width classifications, and were unable to ignore width while making length classifications. This suggests that the perception of length and the perception of width share common processing resources. In a subsequent task, we examined possible interactions between the processing of form and the processing of surface properties. In contrast to the findings with the form task, participants were able to ignore form while making surface-property classifications, and to ignore surface properties while making form classifications. This suggests that the form of objects and their surface properties are processed independently. In experiment 2, we went on to show that the two prominent surface-property dimensions of colour and texture can also be processed independently. In other words, participants were able to ignore colour while making texture classifications, and vice versa. Finally, in experiment 3, we examined the possibility that the stimuli and required responses that we used in experiment 2 were too categorical and thus not optimal for assessing whether or not colour and texture share common processing resources. Using a different stimulus set, participants were again able to ignore colour while making texture classifications, and vice versa. Taken together, these results provided convincing evidence that the separate ventral-stream brain regions identified for form, texture, and colour in a recent neuroimaging study (Cant and Goodale, 2007 Cerebral Cortex 17 713-731) can indeed function independently.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.260 · 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