Bringing the real world into the fMRI scanner: Repetition effects for pictures versus real objects
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
Our understanding of the neural underpinnings of perception is largely built upon studies employing 2-dimensional (2D) planar images. Here we used slow event-related functional imaging in humans to examine whether neural populations show a characteristic repetition-related change in haemodynamic response for real-world 3-dimensional (3D) objects, an effect commonly observed using 2D images. As expected, trials involving 2D pictures of objects produced robust repetition effects within classic object-selective cortical regions along the ventral and dorsal visual processing streams. Surprisingly, however, repetition effects were weak, if not absent on trials involving the 3D objects. These results suggest that the neural mechanisms involved in processing real objects may therefore be distinct from those that arise when we encounter a 2D representation of the same items. These preliminary results suggest the need for further research with ecologically valid stimuli in other imaging designs to broaden our understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying human vision.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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