MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077760499 · doi:10.1167/14.12.6

Time to wave good-bye to phase scrambling: Creating controlled scrambled images using diffeomorphic transformations

2014· article· en· W2077760499 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

VenueJournal of Vision · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScramblingArtificial intelligencePerceptionPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceVisual perceptionVisual processingDistortion (music)Texture (cosmology)Computer visionSet (abstract data type)CommunicationImage (mathematics)PsychologyNeuroscienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To isolate the neural mechanisms associated with recognizing objects from those processing basic visual properties, control stimuli are required that contain the same perceptual properties as the objects but are unrecognizable. We demonstrate that conventional methods for generating control stimuli (phase scrambling, box scrambling, texture scrambling) yield poor controls because they dramatically distort the basic visual properties (e.g., spatial frequency, perceptual organization) to which even the earliest stages of visual processing are sensitive. We developed a new scrambling method, using a diffeomorphic transformation that preserves the basic perceptual properties of the image while removing meaning. We acquired perceptual ratings to determine the least amount of scrambling necessary to remove recognition. We hypothesized that our "diffeomorphic" images would produce neural activity at the earliest stages of the visual system that more closely matched activity in response to intact images relative to the other scrambling methods. To test this hypothesis, we used the HMAX computational model of object recognition and compared the simulated neural activity at the earliest stages of the visual system (layers S1, C1, and S2) between a set of 149 images scrambled using each distortion method to their intact version. We found that scrambled "diffeomorphed" images were indistinguishable to intact images in each layer of the model, but all of the other distortion methods yielded quite different patterns. Our results indicate that "diffeomorphed" images serve as more appropriate control stimuli in neuroimaging studies that aim to disentangle the representations of perceptual and semantic object properties.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.283 · 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