Rapid Processing of Cast and Attached Shadows
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used a visual-search method to investigate the role of shadows in the rapid discrimination of scene properties. Targets and distractors were light or dark 2-D crescents of identical shape and size, on a mid-grey background. From the dark stimuli, illusory 3-D shapes can be created by blurring one arc of the crescent. If the inner arc is blurred, the stimulus is perceived as a curved surface with attached shadow. If the outer arc is blurred, the stimulus is perceived as a flat surface casting a shadow. In a series of five experiments, we used this simple stimulus to map out the shadow properties that the human visual system can rapidly detect and discriminate. To subtract out 2-D image factors, we compared search performance for dark-shadow stimuli with performance for light-shadow stimuli which generally do not elicit strong 3-D percepts. We found that the human visual system is capable of rapid discrimination based upon a number of different shadow properties, including the type of the shadow (cast or attached), the direction of the shadow, and the displacement of the shadow. While it is clear that shadows are not simply discounted in rapid search, it is unclear at this stage whether rapid discrimination is acting upon shadows per se or upon representations of 3-D object shape and position elicited by perceived shadows.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it