MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043929732 · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.1.1

Temporal integration in face perception: Evidence of configural processing of temporally separated face parts.

2007· article· en· W2043929732 on OpenAlexaff
David Anaki, Jennifer Boyd, Morris Moscovitch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBaycrest Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)PerceptionFace perceptionInterval (graph theory)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceVisual perceptionFace (sociological concept)Computer visionSpeech recognitionPsychologyMathematicsGeologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temporal integration is the process by which temporally separated visual components are combined into a unified representation. Although this process has been studied in object recognition, little is known about temporal integration in face perception and recognition. In the present study, the authors investigated the characteristics and time boundaries of facial temporal integration. Whole faces of nonfamous and famous people were segmented horizontally into 3 parts and presented in sequence, with varying interval lengths between parts. Inversion and misalignment effects were found at short intervals (0-200 ms). Moreover, their magnitude was comparable to those found with whole-face presentations. These effects were eliminated, or substantially reduced, when the delay interval was 700 ms. Order of parts presentation did not influence the pattern of inversion effects obtained within each temporal delay condition. These results demonstrate that temporal integration of faces occurs in a temporary and limited visual buffer. Moreover, they indicate that only integrated faces can undergo configural processing.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & PerformanceSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207