Motion-induced blindness and microsaccades: Cause and effect
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
It has been suggested that subjective disappearance of visual stimuli results from a spontaneous reduction of microsaccade rate causing image stabilization, enhanced adaptation, and a consequent fading. In motion-induced blindness (MIB), salient visual targets disappear intermittently when surrounded by a moving pattern. We investigated whether changes in microsaccade rate can account for MIB. We first determined that the moving mask does not affect microsaccade metrics (rate, magnitude, and temporal distribution). We then compared the dynamics of microsaccades during reported illusory disappearance (MIB) and physical disappearance (Replay) of a salient peripheral target. We found large modulations of microsaccade rate following perceptual transitions, whether illusory (MIB) or real (Replay). For MIB, the rate also decreased prior to disappearance and increased prior to reappearance. Importantly, MIB persisted in the presence of microsaccades although sustained microsaccade rate was lower during invisible than visible periods. These results suggest that the microsaccade system reacts to changes in visibility, but microsaccades also modulate MIB. The latter modulation is well described by a Poisson model of the perceptual transitions assuming that the probability for reappearance and disappearance is modulated following a microsaccade. Our results show that microsaccades counteract disappearance but are neither necessary nor sufficient to account for MIB.
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