Face Contour is Crucial to the Fat Face Illusion
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
In 2010 Thompson reported a "fat face thin" illusion that, when next to an inverted face, an upright face looks "fatter". Sun et al (2012 Perception 41 117-120) observed that one of the faces need not be inverted for the illusion to emerge: when two identical faces are presented one above the other, the face at the bottom appears "fatter" than the top one. Neither inverted faces nor clocks induced the illusion. Here we conducted three experiments probing the role that face contour plays in producing the fat face illusion. In experiment 1 line drawing faces were found to induce the illusion, suggesting that face contour is important for producing the illusion. In experiment 2 line drawing faces with scrambled internal features and empty line drawing faces devoid of internal features were found to induce the illusion. In experiment 3 internal face features arranged in their canonical face layout, but not in a scrambled layout, were found to induce the illusion. However, the magnitude of the effect was significantly weaker than the effect obtained for empty face contour in experiment 2. Collectively, these results suggest that a fat face illusion is obtained when there is sufficient information in the stimulus to activate an internal face schema.
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) | 0.016 | 0.044 |
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