MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899572403 · doi:10.1016/j.visres.2018.10.013

Phase-selective masking with radial frequency contours

2018· article· en· W2899572403 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Slugocki, Allison B. Sekuler, Patrick Bennett

Bibliographic record

VenueVision Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsMasking (illustration)CurvatureMaxima and minimaPhase (matter)Offset (computer science)OpticsSensitivity (control systems)PhysicsAcousticsMathematicsGeometryMathematical analysisComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensitivity to changes in the shape of a closed-contour figure is affected by surrounding figures (Vision Research 44 (2004) 2815-2823). We examined how between-contour masking depends on radial frequency. Experiment 1 replicated previous studies that found that masking between adjacent radial frequency (RF) patterns was greatest when the two shapes were phase aligned, and that the magnitude of masking declined approximately linearly with increasing phase offsets. In addition, we found that the effect of phase offset on masking was very similar for RFs ranging from 3 to 8, a result that suggests that sensitivity to phase decreases with increasing radial frequency. Experiment 2 tested this idea and found that phase discrimination threshold for single cycles of curvature was approximately proportional to radial frequency. Experiment 3 showed that both curvature maxima and minima contribute to phase dependent masking between RF contours. Together, Experiments 1-3 demonstrate that the strength of phase-dependent masking does not depend on RF, but is related to sensitivity for phase shifts in isolated contours, and is affected by both positive and negative curvature extrema. We discuss these results in relation to properties of curvature sensitive neurons.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.307 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVision ResearchSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207