MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790049157 · doi:10.1101/258590

Perceived timing of active head movement at different speeds

2018· preprint· en· W2790049157 on OpenAlexaff
Carolin Sachgau, William Chung, Michael Barnett‐Cowan

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovement (music)PerceptionStimulus (psychology)Sensory systemHead (geology)PsychologyObserver (physics)AudiologyCommunicationCognitive psychologyNeurosciencePhysicsMedicineAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The central nervous system must determine which sensory events occur at the same time. Actively moving the head corresponds with large changes in the relationship between the observer and the environment, sensorimotor processing, and spatiotemporal perception. Numerous studies have shown that head movement onset must precede the onset of other sensory events in order to be perceived as simultaneous, indicating that head movement perception is slow. Active head movement perception has been shown to be slower than passive head movement perception and dependent on head movement velocity, where participants who move their head faster than other participants require the head to move even earlier than comparison stimuli to be perceived as simultaneous. These results suggest that head movement perception is slower (i.e., suppressed) when the head moves faster. The present study used a within-subjects design to measure the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS) between active head movement speeds and a comparison sound stimulus. Our results clearly show that i) head movement perception is faster when the head moves faster within-subjects, ii) active head movement onset must still precede the onset of other sensory events (Average PSS: -123 to -52 ms) in order to be perceived as occurring simultaneously even at the fastest speeds (Average peak velocity: 76°/s to 257°/s). We conclude that head movement perception is slow, but that this delay is minimized with increased speed. While we do not provide evidence against sensory suppression, which requires active versus passive head movement comparison, our results do rule out velocity-based suppression.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207