MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tau and Depth Cues Influence the Position of Braking in Virtual Environment

2011· article· en· W2082219537 on OpenAlexaff
Wei TAO, Hong‐Jin Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced materials research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBrakeObstacleDepth perceptionPerceptionBraking distanceVirtual realityComputer scienceThreshold brakingCollisionComputer visionPosition (finance)SimulationPsychologyArtificial intelligenceAutomotive engineeringEngineeringNeuroscienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate whether both the sources of visual information tau cue and depth cue were utilized to guide braking, in the present study we used the virtual reality technology which could decouple the dilation rate of visual object and depth cue. Participants were instructed to park a car to an obstacle as closely as possible and avoid making collision. Results showed: (1) on the condition of same initial distance from car to an obstacle, participants tended to brake in advance on tau speed-up condition, which caused longer distance from braking to an obstacle than on control condition(tau and depth cue couple);While participants tended to postpone braking on tau speed-down condition, which caused the shorter distance from braking to an obstacle than on control condition; (2) On tau speed-up and tau speed-down condition, participants automatically fine-tuned the actual braking position to avoid making collision. These results suggested that both tau cue and depth cue were processed and utilized to direct the behavior of braking by our visual perceptual system.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced materials researchSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207