MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2398474393

Visually-induced reorientation illusions as a function of age.

2000· article· en· W2398474393 on OpenAlexaff
Howard Ip, Jenkin Hl, Hu Guo

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIllusionVestibular systemOptical illusionLevitationPsychologyProprioceptionSupine positionCognitive psychologyAudiologyCommunicationPhysicsMedicineNeuroscience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We reported previously that supine subjects inside a furnished room who are tilted 90 degrees may experience themselves and the room as upright to gravity. We call this the levitation illusion because it creates sensations similar to those experienced in weightlessness. It is an example of a larger class of novel static reorientation illusions that we have explored. Stationary subjects inside a furnished room rotating about a horizontal axis experience complete self rotation about the roll or pitch axis. We call this a dynamic reorientation illusion. We have determined the incidence of static and dynamic reorientation illusions in subjects ranging in age from 9 to 78 yr. Some 90% of subjects of all ages experienced the dynamic reorientation illusion but the percentage of subjects experiencing static reorientation illusions increased with age. We propose that the dynamic illusion depends on a primitive mechanism of visual-vestibular interaction but that static reorientation illusions depend on learned visual cues to the vertical arising from the perceived tops and bottoms of familiar objects and spatial relationships between objects. Older people become more dependent on visual polarity to compensate for loss in vestibular sensitivity. Of 9 astronauts, 4 experienced the levitation illusion. The relationship between susceptibility to reorientation illusions on Earth and in space has still to be determined. We propose that the Space Station will be less disorienting if pictures of familiar objects line the walls.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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