MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090473473 · doi:10.1163/1568568041920186

Varied-mapping conjunction search: Evidence for rule-based learning

2004· article· en· W2090473473 on OpenAlexafffund
Lisa McPhee, Charles T. Scialfa, Geoffrey Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueSpatial Vision · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConjunction (astronomy)AutomaticityVisual searchOrientation (vector space)Contrast (vision)Polarity (international relations)PsychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)CognitionNeuroscienceMathematicsBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Five experiments were carried out to examine whether top-down processes can aid search, even when targets and distractors are variably mapped. Experiments 1a and 1b determined that effortless VM search can be obtained in Contrast Polarity X Orientation and Color X Orientation conjunction search when one feature dimension remains consistently mapped across blocks. Experiment 2 showed that efficient VM search is possible when both dimensions are variably mapped. In Experiment 3, efficient VM search was found when target-distractor reversals occurred on a trial-wise basis. Experiments 4 and 5 found that VM search deteriorates when target identity is not known prior to display onset. These studies demonstrate the role of top-down mechanisms in the development of efficient VM search and present several challenges to strength-theoretic views on the mechanisms underlying automaticity.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpatial VisionSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207