MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300691115 · doi:10.1111/psyp.12606

Early and late selection modulate competition for representation: Evidence from the N2pc in a multiple frame procedure

2016· article· en· W2300691115 on OpenAlexaff
Sébrina Aubin, Pierre Jolicœur

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsInternational Laboratory for Brain, Music and Sound ResearchInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsN2pcSalientPsychologySelection (genetic algorithm)Cognitive psychologyVisual searchSimilarity (geometry)CommunicationLatency (audio)Visual attentionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceNeurosciencePerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, both bottom-up and top-down influences on processes of visual attention deployment are tested by examining the interaction between the similarity of a salient distractor to a salient target and the physical distance separating attended items in the visual field. Distractor-target similarity was varied both on a semantic and a physical level. Additionally, across experiments, the similarity of the salient items could vary in form, color, or both. Three experiments identified interactive relationships between these factors on the amplitude and the latency of N2pc, an ERP associated to the deployment of visuospatial attention. Results show the influence of both early form-based selection and late identification-based selection processes on the N2pc. Furthermore, selection processes appear to be dependent on the spatial proximity of the attended items, suggesting that some processes may operate on a local spatial scale.

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)0.000
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 score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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