Perceptual and Cognitive Characteristics of Common Playing Cards
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the perceptual and cognitive characteristics of the playing cards commonly used in the Western world. Specifically, we measured their visibility, memorability, likability, and verbal and visual accessibility. Based on visibility and memorability, four groups of cards were distinguished: the Ace of Spades, other Aces, number cards, and face cards. Within each of these groups, there were few differences due to value or suit. Based on likability and accessibility, three additional groups were distinguished: the Ace of Hearts, Queen of Hearts, and King of Hearts. Several interesting relations were found between how people remember, like, and access cards; some of these were similar to effects found in studies of visual perception, while others seemed entirely new. Our results demonstrate that rigorous examination of real-world stimuli can shed light on the perception of ordinary objects, as well as help us understand why magic works in the mind.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it