Simultaneous density contrast is bidirectional
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simultaneous density contrast, or SDC, is the phenomenon in which the perceived density of a textured region is altered by a surround of different density (Mackay, 1973). SDC provides an experimental tool to investigate mechanisms of density coding, yet has not been systematically examined. We measured SDC with a 2AFC staircase procedure in which human observers judged which of two patterns, one with and one without a surround, appeared more dense. We used a range of surround densities varying from very sparse to very dense (0-76.8 dots/deg2), and two center test densities (6.4 and 12.8 dots/deg2). Psychometric functions were used to estimate both the points of subjective equality (PSE) and their precision. Unexpectedly we find a bidirectional SDC effect across the five observers: Not only does a denser surround reduce perceived density of the center, but a sparser surround enhances its perceived density. We also show that SDC is not mediated by either contrast-contrast or spatial-frequency contrast. Our results suggest the presence of multiple channels selective for texture density, with lateral inhibitory interactions between them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".