MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2574368019

Preparing and Presenting Complex Images for Perceptual Cognitive Studies

2011· article· en· W2574368019 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Javid Sadr

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionCognitionPsychologyCategorizationCognitive neuroscienceCognitive scienceCognitive psychologyPerceptual learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preparing and Presenting Complex Images for Perceptual Cognitive Studies Javid Sadr (sadr@uleth.ca) Departments of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Lethbridge 4401 University Drive, Lethbridge, AB T1K 3M4 CANADA tel.: 403.332.4530, fax: 403.329.2555 Keywords: perception; methods; image processing; priming; perceptual learning; masking; imaging; neural correlates; detection; categorization; recognition; objects; faces; scenes Pollack & Sinha, 2002); neural correlates of perception, perceptual learning, and new measures of priming (Eger, Henson, Driver & Dolan, 2007; Liu, Harris & Kanwisher, 2002; Sadr & Sinha, 2003, 2004); dissociating sequential stages of object and face processing (Liu, Harris & Kanwisher, 2002; Mack, Gauthier, Sadr & Palmeri, 2008); mechanisms of scene perception and explorations of different masking techniques/stimuli (Loschky et al, 2010). Introduction: Objectives and Scope The goal of this tutorial is to reduce the barriers of entry for cognitive scientists interested in studying perceptual/ cognitive processes with complex, real-world stimuli - and in doing so with confidence in their underlying techniques and conceptual approach. The content of this session will span basic topics in the selection/creation and (crucial) pre- processing of complex images; powerful stimulus manipu- lation techniques, including image degradation and filtering methods; and important considerations in experimental presentation (e.g., display choice and calibration, web-based studies) and design of perceptual-cognitive tasks/paradigms. Motivations, Applications, and Audience From even a quick survey of publications in the field, it's clear that interest in perceptual (particularly visual) research in the cognitive sciences is not merely enormous but ever- growing. This is not surprising in a sense: the role of perceptual processes in cognition can hardly be overstated, and in some ways it's hard to imagine one without the other. However, many studies limit themselves, for good reason, to very basic visual stimuli (e.g., dots, lines, simple shapes), while in other studies the move to complex stimuli and high-level perceptual/cognitive phenomena (e.g., object, face, and scene perception) has at times led to unfortunate missteps or misinterpretations relating to stimulus control, manipulation, and experimental presentation or task design - including potential confounds in behavioural and neural measures resulting from low-level image properties. A very simple example (Fig. 1) illustrates how attempts to study spatial-frequency effects in a perception task could coincide with large shifts in image contrast, a critical stimulus variable; such confounds may plague a variety of stimuli and image manipulations, greatly undermining a study's findings and interpretations (e.g., Rainer et al, 2001). We have previously reviewed in detail a wide range of these methodological concerns, consequences, and corrective measures (Sadr & Sinha, 2001a, 2004), and the fundamental concepts and techniques covered in this tutorial (informed in part by our technical and experimental work [e.g., Sadr & Sinha, 2001a, 2001b, 2003, 2004; Mack, Gauthier, Sadr & Palmeri, 2008; Willenbockel et al, 2010]) are now being employed in a wide range of cognitive and neuro- science research, including: developmental and clinical studies (e.g., Bernstein, Loftus & Meltzoff, 2005; Figure 1: Original image versus typical low-pass ( blur ) and high-pass ( edge ) images: potential confound in image contrast, seen in luminance histogram's standard deviation. With sharply growing interest and activity in such research areas, and a enduring concern for implementing these techniques soundly, this tutorial is tailored for scientists interested in, but new to, higher-level perceptual/ cognitive processes and complex images, as well as those currently exploring such research but perhaps seeking greater comfort with and intuition for underlying techniques and concepts. Given the diversity of the audience, our session is intended to be flexible in its scope, depth, and progression and is primarily conceived at a level well-suited to a range of participants, from those with little or no back- ground to those with an intermediate level of experience. Tutorial Approach and Participation Our tutorial's overall structure will follow a progression of core topics and techniques, from basic concepts and handling of images all the way to stimulus manipulation and experimental presentation. Along the way, we will try to address questions and requests regarding subtopics or special applications as fitting the participants' interests. At each step, the topics and techniques will be illustrated by the tutorial organizer or optionally performed as activities by participants who might wish to bring a computer. Tutorial content will be provided partly in print (e.g., content from presentations) and partly via electronic resources online.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1840.082

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207