MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2076533406 · doi:10.1167/8.6.1020

State-dependent dynamic grouping and the perception of motion

2010· article· en· W2076533406 on OpenAlexaff
Howard S. Hock, D.R Nichols

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestalt psychologyLuminancePerceptionStimulus (psychology)CommunicationArtificial intelligenceMotion perceptionIllusionComputer visionMotion (physics)PsychologyKinetic depth effectMathematicsComputer scienceCognitive psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major legacy of the Gestalt Psychology movement was the determination that perceptual organization is based on laws of grouping. In many of their demonstrations, effects of grouping variables on the compositional structure of a stimulus are perceptually realized as qualitative changes in the spatial pattern perceived for the stimulus (e.g., multi-element grids of dots are grouped into horizontal rows or vertical columns). This, however, is not generally the case when multiple surfaces are connected to form an object. Changing the luminance of one surface of an object can change the object's compositional structure without resulting in the perception of a qualitatively different spatial pattern. We now show, however, that changes in the compositional structure of objects can be perceptually realized through motion created by dynamic grouping, even without qualitative changes in the perceived spatial pattern. (Such changes co-occurred with motion in an earlier study of how grouping/parsing affects on motion perception; Tse, Cavanagh & Nakayama, 1998.) Method. Stimuli were composed of two or three connected surfaces, one of which changed in luminance. Motion was perceived within the changing surface, as in the line motion illusion. Results. We have found that changes in grouping variables (luminance and texture similarity; good continuation) that increase a surface's affinity with an adjacent surface result in motion perception away from the boundary separating the surfaces. Motion is toward the boundary when affinity decreases. Moreover, the likelihood of a change in affinity resulting in motion perception depends on the nonlinear summation of the affinities ascribable to individual grouping variables (specifically, an accelerating nonlinearity), and the surface's affinity-state prior to the change in grouping variables. Additional experiments have shown that compositional structure affects how motion due to dynamic grouping and motion due to changes in edge and surface contrast function in tandem.

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research→French-language works237,207→