Still moving: The double-drift illusion survives smooth pursuit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract If a gabor pattern drifts in one direction while its internal texture drifts in the orthogonal direction, observers see a remarkable shift in its perceived direction when it is viewed in the periphery. The reported direction of the double-drift stimulus (also known as the infinite regress and curveball illusions) is some combination of the actual external motion of the gabor envelope and the internal motion of its texture (Tse & Hsieh, 2006). Here we find that if the observers track a fixation point that moves in tandem with the gabor, the illusion is undiminished. The pursuit of the moving fixation spot keeps the gabor roughly fixed at one location on the retina, cancelling its external motion, leaving only the internal motion. The gabor is seen to move in the world at roughly its actual speed as the motion of the eye is discounted at some point to recover velocities in world coordinates (e.g. Wallach, 1959). Our finding indicates that the combination of internal and external motion that produces the double drift illusion must happen after the eye movement signals have been factored into stimulus motions. We also test the double drift effect at various path lengths, durations, and speeds, with both mid-grey and black backgrounds, all with a static fixation. These results confirm that a simple vector combination of the two speeds alone accounts for virtually all the direction shifts on the grey background. On the black background, the illusion is eliminated. These results place constraints on where perceived spatial coordinates arise in the visual processing hierarchy to locations at or beyond where compensation for pursuit eye movements arise, specifically V3A, V6, MSTd, and VIP (e.g., Nau et al, 2018).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".