MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152698923 · doi:10.1017/s0952523809990289

Sounds can affect visual perception mediated primarily by the parvocellular pathway

2009· article· en· W2152698923 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Jaekl, Laurence R. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueVisual Neuroscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParvocellular cellOrientation (vector space)PerceptionCommunicationCrossmodalPsychologyLuminanceSound (geography)Visual perceptionPsychophysicsComputer visionNeuroscienceComputer scienceAcousticsMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the effect of auditory-visual sensory integration on visual tasks that were predominantly dependent on parvocellular processing. These tasks were (i) detecting metacontrast-masked targets and (ii) discriminating orientation differences between high spatial frequency Gabor patch stimuli. Sounds that contained no information relevant to either task were presented before, synchronized with, or after the visual targets, and the results were compared to conditions with no sound. Both tasks used a two-alternative forced choice technique. For detecting metacontrast-masked targets, one interval contained the visual target and both (or neither) intervals contained a sound. Sound-target synchrony within 50 ms lowered luminance thresholds for detecting the presence of a target compared to when no sound occurred or when sound onset preceded target onset. Threshold angles for discriminating the orientation of a Gabor patch consistently increased in the presence of a sound. These results are compatible with sound-induced activity in the parvocellular visual pathway increasing the visibility of flashed targets and hindering orientation discrimination.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations24
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVisual NeuroscienceSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207