Visual-Vestibular Sensory Integration During Congruent and Incongruent Self-Motion Percepts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examined the contribution of vestibular cues to self-motion perception and their integration with visual self-motion cues.The thesis is divided into five sections.In Section 1, a review of the illusory self-motion perception (i.e., 'vection') literature situates studies undertaken in this thesis.Topics reviewed include vection research, vestibular anatomy and physiology, visual-vestibular sensory integration, visual-vestibular neurophysiology and measurement methods to index vection.In Section 2, two experiments were reported.In E1, a virtual drum was displayed on a virtual reality headset.In E2, a novel measurement method consisting of a circular knob that participants rotated when experiencing vection was used to provide a direct measure of vection speed, direction, and duration.Results showed that vection strength and speed increased as visual stimuli moved faster.In Section 3, two experiments were reported in which circular vection was induced using vestibular air caloric stimulation.Participants had their eyes closed in E3 while receiving caloric vestibular stimulation.In E4 participants received caloric vestibular stimulation while viewing a stationary image in a VR headset.Participants perceived vection in the clockwise direction when cold air was applied to the left ear, and perceived counter-clockwise vection when caloric stimulation was in the right ear.Vection speed and duration measures were significantly smaller when participants viewed a stationary display (E4) than when their eyes were closed (E3).In Section 4, the goal was to determine if the visual or vestibular system prevailed in determining direction of self-motion perception during cue conflict.Participants observed an optic flow pattern that induced circular vection while receiving caloric vestibular stimulation also inducing vection.Visual and vestibular stimuli induced vection of approximately equal speeds in two conditions.In the 'congruent motion' condition, visual and vestibular stimuli signaled vection in the same direction.In the 'incongruent motion' condition, visual and vestibular stimuli signaled vection in opposite directions.Results showed that in the incongruent condition, participants experienced vection in the direction signaled by the visual stimulus and vestibular stimulus equal amounts of times.In Section 5, a general discussion on these findings as they relate to optimal cue integration hypothesis is provided.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".