MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122593667 · doi:10.1152/jn.00934.2004

Perceptual Continuity and the Emergence of Perceptual Persistence in the Ventral Visual Pathway

2005· article· en· W2122593667 on OpenAlexaff
Mary‐Ellen Large, Adrian Aldcroft, Tutis Vilis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionPersistence (discontinuity)PsychologyCognitive psychologyCommunicationVisual perceptionNeuroscienceVisual systemVisual cortex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perceptual continuity is an important aspect of our experience of the visual world. In this study, we focus on an example of perceptual continuity involving the maintenance of figure-ground segregation despite the removal of binding cues that initiated the segregation. Fragmented line drawings of objects were superimposed on a background of randomly oriented lines. Global forms could be discriminated from the background based on differences in motion or differences in color/brightness. Furthermore, perception of a global form persisted after the binding cue had been removed. A comparison between the persistence of forms constructed from motion or color demonstrated that both forms produced persistence after the object defining cues were removed. Functional imaging showed a gradual increase in the persistence of brain activity in the lower visual areas (V1, V2, VP), which reached significance in V4v and peaked in the lateral occipital area. There was no difference in the location of persistence for color- or motion-defined forms. These results suggest that the retention of a global percept is an emerging property of the ventral visual processing stream and the maintenance of grouped visual elements is independent of cue type. We postulated that perceptual persistence depends on a system of perceptual memory reflecting the state of perceptual organization.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations42
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207