Meridian interference reveals neural locus of motion-induced position shifts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a Gabor patch moves along a path in one direction while its internal texture drifts orthogonally to this path, it can appear to deviate from its physical path by 45° or more. This double-drift illusion is different from other motion-induced position shift effects in several ways: it has an integration period of over a second; the illusory displacement that accumulates over a second or more is orthogonal to rather than along the motion path; the perceptual deviations are much larger; and they have little or no effect on eye movements to the target. In this study we investigated the underlying neural mechanisms of the motion integration and position processing for this double-drift stimulus by testing possible anatomical constraints on its magnitude. We found that the illusion was reduced at the vertical and horizontal meridians when the perceptual path would cross or be driven toward the meridian, but not at other locations or other motion directions. The disruption of the accumulation of the position error at both the horizontal and vertical meridians suggests a central role of quadrantic areas in the generation of this type of motion-induced position shift. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The remarkably strong double-drift illusion is disrupted at both the vertical and horizontal meridians. We propose that this finding is the behavioral consequence of the anatomical gaps at both meridians, suggesting that neural areas with quadrantic representations (e.g., V2, V3) are the initial locus of this motion-induced position shift. This result rules out V1 as the source of the illusion because it has an anatomical break only at the vertical meridian.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".