MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323820005 · doi:10.4992/jjpsy.73.270

Binocular rivalry in half-occluded region is weakened by eye movement

2002· article· en· W2323820005 on OpenAlexaff
Masahiro Suzuki

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Japanese journal of psychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinocular rivalryBinocular visionPsychologyEye movementMonocularMonocular visionRivalryOptometryMovement (music)Computer visionAudiologyVisual perceptionNeurosciencePerceptionMedicineComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the effect of eye movement on suppression of binocular rivalry in the half-occluded region, which is the monocular region made by occlusion, the amount of binocular rivalry in the half-occluded region was measured in the eye movement condition and the fixating condition. In the eye movement condition, the observer moved their eyes between the occluder and the occluded object. In the fixating condition, the observers fixated the occluder (the fixating-the-occluder condition) or the occluded object (the fixating-the-occluded-object condition). Following facts were found: (a) the amount of binocular rivalry in the half-occluded region reduced more in the eye movement condition than in the two fixating conditions, (b) there was no significant difference in the amount of binocular rivalry in the half-occluded region between the two fixating conditions. These results suggested that eye movement is one of the factors to suppress binocular rivalry in the half-occluded region in natural viewing situations.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Japanese journal of psychologySame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207