Motion parallax in electric sensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A crucial step in forming spatial representations of the environment involves the estimation of relative distance. Active sampling through specific movements is considered essential for optimizing the sensory flow that enables the extraction of distance cues. However, in electric sensing, direct evidence for the generation and exploitation of sensory flow is lacking. Weakly electric fish rely on a self-generated electric field to navigate and capture prey in the dark. This electric sense provides a blurred representation of the environment, making the exquisite sensory abilities of electric fish enigmatic. Stereotyped back-and-forth swimming patterns reminiscent of visual peering movements are suggestive of the active generation of sensory flow, but how motion contributes to the disambiguation of the electrosensory world remains unclear. Here, we show that a dipole-like electric field geometry coupled to motion provides the physical basis for a nonvisual parallax. We then show in a behavioral assay that this cue is used for electrosensory distance perception across phylogenetically distant taxa of weakly electric fish. Notably, these species electrically sample the environment in temporally distinct ways (using discrete pulses or quasisinusoidal waves), suggesting a ubiquitous role for parallax in electric sensing. Our results demonstrate that electrosensory information is extracted from sensory flow and used in a behaviorally relevant context. A better understanding of motion-based electric sensing will provide insight into the sensorimotor coordination required for active sensing in general and may lead to improved electric field-based imaging applications in a variety of contexts.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".