MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sparsely distributed contours dominate extra-striate responses to complex scenes

2008· article· en· W2101213920 on OpenAlexaff
Serge O. Dumoulin, Steven C. Dakin, Robert F. Hess

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsVisual cortexArtificial intelligenceComputer visionContrast (vision)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Redundancy (engineering)NeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human visual system exploits redundancy in natural scenes to derive useful information. Such redundancy is frequently associated with either contours or textures within images. In this study we use fMRI to evaluate how the total amount of contrast-energy contained in contours and textures within natural images affect responses in visual cortex. We used both the entire natural image and parts of it containing predominantly contour or texture information. We modified these natural images in order to match other image properties that are known to affect cortical responses as closely as possible. These modified natural images, i.e. pseudo-natural images, remain highly recognizable. We also used synthetic images without recognizable content but with closely matched image properties. We report that most of the primary visual cortex (V1) signal variations are explained by the total amount of contrast-energy in the images. Extra-striate visual cortex, on the other hand, is driven strongest by images containing sparsely distributed contours; independent of contrast-energy amount or recognizable image content. These results provide evidence for an initial representation of natural images in V1 based on local oriented filters. Later visual cortex (and to a modest degree V1) incorporates a facilitation of contour-based structure and suppressive interactions that effectively amplify sparse-contour information within natural images.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.068 · 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.

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

Citations28
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207