Squeezing Uncertainty from Saccadic Compression
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
Brief visual stimuli presented before and during a saccade are often mislocalized due to spatial compression. This saccadic compression effect is thought to have a perceptual basis, and results in visual objects being squeezed together and their number underestimated. Here we show that observers are also uncertain about their visual experiences just before and during a saccade. It is known that responses tend to be biased away from extreme values under conditions of uncertainty. Thus, a plausible alternative explanation of compression is that it reflects the uncertainty-bias to underestimate the number of items that were presented. We test this hypothesis and find that saccadic compression is independent of certainty, and is significantly modulated by orientation, with larger effects for stimuli oriented horizontally, in the direction of the saccade. These findings confirm that saccadic compression is a perceptual phenomenon that may enable seamless perceptual continuity across saccades.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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