Frogs Jump Forward: Semantic Knowledge Influences the Perception of Element Motion in the Ternus Display
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
The Ternus effect is a robust illusion of motion that produces element motion at short interstimulus intervals (ISIs; < 50 ms) and group motion at longer ISIs (> 50 ms). Previous research has shown that the nature of the stimuli (e.g., similarity, grouping), not just ISI, can influence the likelihood of perceiving element or group motion. We examined if semantic knowledge can also influence what type of illusory motion is perceived. In Experiment I, we used a modified Ternus display with pictures of frogs in a jump-ready pose facing forwards or backwards to the direction of illusory motion. Participants perceived more element motion with the forward-facing frogs and more group motion with the backward-facing frogs. Experiment 2 tested whether this effect would still occur with line drawings of frogs, or if a more life-like image was necessary. Experiment 3 tested whether this effect was due to visual asymmetries inherent in the jumping pose. Experiment 4 tested whether frogs in a "non-jumping," sedentary pose would replicate the original effect. These experiments elucidate the role of semantic knowledge in the Ternus effect. Prior knowledge of the movement of certain animate objects, in this case, frogs can also bias the perception of element or group motion.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it