MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784688312 · doi:10.1167/18.1.11

Interocular correlation sensitivity and its relationship with stereopsis

2018· article· en· W2784688312 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandre Reynaud, Robert F. Hess

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCorrelationSensitivity (control systems)Binocular disparityStereopsisContrast (vision)Stimulus (psychology)StereoscopyPsychophysicsSpatial frequencyOpticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceAudiologyComputer visionPhysicsPsychologyComputer sciencePerceptionMedicineNeuroscienceCognitive psychologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stereoscopic vision uses the disparity between the images received by the two eyes to derive three-dimensional estimates. Here, we were interested in providing a measure of the strength of binocular vision alternate to disparity processing. In particular, we wanted to assess the spatial dependence of sensitivity to detect interocular correlation (IOC). Thus we designed dichoptic stimuli composed of bandpass textures whose IOC is sinusoidally modulated at different correlation frequencies and compared sensitivity to these stimuli to that of analogous stimuli modulated in disparity. We observed that the IOC sensitivity is low pass/band pass and increases with stimulus duration and contrast in a similar way to that of disparity sensitivity. IOC sensitivity is only weakly, though significantly, correlated with disparity sensitivity in the population. It could provide an alternate measure of binocular sensitivity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207