MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775824922 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0188373

Effect of age and stereopsis on a multiple-object tracking task

2017· article· en· W2775824922 on OpenAlexafffund
Marjolaine Plourde, Marie-Eve Corbeil, Jocelyn Faubert

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStereopsisTask (project management)StereoscopyCrowdsDepth perceptionAge groupsObject (grammar)Artificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyComputer visionComputer scienceAudiologyMedicineDemographyPerceptionNeuroscienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D vision develops during childhood and tends to diminish after 65 years of age. It is still relatively unknown how stereopsis is used in more complex/ecological contexts such as when walking about in crowds where objects are in motion and occlusions occur. One task that shares characteristics with the requirements for processing dynamic crowds is the multiple object-tracking task (MOT). In the present study we evaluated the impact of stereopsis on a MOT task as a function of age. A total of 60 observers consisting of three groups of 20 subjects (7-12 years old, 18-40 years old and 65 years and older) completed the task in both conditions (with and without stereoscopic effects). The adult group obtained the better scores, followed by the children and the older adult group. The performance difference between the stereoscopic and non-stereoscopic conditions was significant and similar for the adults and the children but was non significant for the older observers. These results show that stereopsis helps children and adults accomplish a MOT task, but has no impact on older adults' performances. The present results have implications as to how populations differ in their efficiency of using stereoscopic cues for disambiguating complex dynamic scenes.

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)0.003
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207