MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2088375358 · doi:10.1167/10.7.1376

Comparing properties of the spatial integration of local signals into perceived global structure

2010· article· en· W2088375358 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Isaac Meso, R. F. Hess

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLuminanceSpatial frequencyStimulus (psychology)OpticsMotion perceptionNarrowbandPsychophysicsPhysicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePsychologyMotion (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensitivity to global structure was investigated using a stimulus containing perceived vertical or horizontal bands generated by superimposing a pair of narrowband noise images modulated by two out of phase periodic functions (Watson & Eckert, 1994 JOSA, A(11)496-505). We probed a moving version of the stimulus in which components making up the pair of noise images have opposite directions of motion and then a static analogue in which the pair of components have orthogonal directions of carrier orientation. The stimuli contain local signals characterised by the carrier frequency which have to be integrated over a larger spatial extent determined by the modulation frequency, which we therefore considered a global parameter. We obtained threshold luminance and modulator contrast sensitivities using a two interval 2AFC psychophysical detection task. We found that the motion stimulus showed band-pass tuning of the ratio of carrier to modulation frequency with a peak corresponding to an optimum sensitivity where the modulator is of a scale of ten times the carrier. This optimal sensitivity was found to be scale invariant over a range of retinal image sizes varied up to a factor of 10 with a fixed number of modulator cycles. This result suggests a coupling between the spatial frequency of local motion detection stages and the integration process, which happen at a larger scale. In the case of the static orientation stimulus, a much broader tuning was found, which showed an optimum at a higher ratio (<50). Observers were more sensitive to carrier orientation in the cardinal axes that the obliques, with the broader optimum ratio also shifted slightly in the two cases. Our results suggest that there is substantial spatial pooling of local signals which exhibits different properties for moving stimuli compared with orientation stimuli.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.330
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

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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanisms→French-language works237,207→