Perception of Trigeminal Mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The trigeminal system is a chemical sense allowing for the perception of chemosensory information in our environment. However, contrary to smell and taste, we lack a thorough understanding of the trigeminal processing of mixtures. We, therefore, investigated trigeminal perception using mixtures of 3 relatively receptor-specific agonists together with one control odor in different proportions to determine basic perceptual dimensions of trigeminal perception. We found that 4 main dimensions were linked to trigeminal perception: sensations of intensity, warmth, coldness, and pain. We subsequently investigated perception of binary mixtures of trigeminal stimuli by means of these 4 perceptual dimensions using different concentrations of a cooling stimulus (eucalyptol) mixed with a stimulus that evokes warmth perception (cinnamaldehyde). To determine if sensory interactions are mainly of central or peripheral origin, we presented stimuli in a physical "mixture" or as a "combination" presented separately to individual nostrils. Results showed that mixtures generally yielded higher ratings than combinations on the trigeminal dimensions "intensity," "warm," and "painful," whereas combinations yielded higher ratings than mixtures on the trigeminal dimension "cold." These results suggest dimension-specific interactions in the perception of trigeminal mixtures, which may be explained by particular interactions that may take place on peripheral or central levels.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".