MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012089754 · doi:10.1037/rev0000185

Modeling continuous outcome color decisions with the circular diffusion model: Metric and categorical properties.

2020· article· en· W3012089754 on OpenAlexaff
Philip L. Smith, Saam Saber, Simon D. Lilburn

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsCategorical variableMetric (unit)Outcome (game theory)MathematicsPsychologyEconometricsStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematical economicsEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The circular diffusion model is extended to provide a theory of the speed and accuracy of continuous outcome color decisions and used to characterize eye-movement decisions about the hues of noisy color patches in an isoluminant, equidiscriminability color space. Heavy-tailed distributions of decision outcomes were found with high levels of chromatic noise, similar to those found in visual working memory studies with high memory loads. Decision times were longer for less accurate decisions, in agreement with the slow error property typically found in difficult 2-choice tasks. Decision times were shorter, and responses were more accurate in parts of the space corresponding to nameable color categories, although the number and locations of the categories varied among participants. We show that these findings can be predicted by a theory of across-trial variability in the quality of the evidence entering the decision process, represented mathematically by the drift rate of the diffusion process. The heavy-tailed distributions of decision outcomes and the slow-error pattern can be predicted by either of 2 models of drift rate. One model is based on encoding failures and the other is based on a nonlinear transformation of the stimulus space. Both models predict highly inaccurate stimulus representations on some trials, leading to heavy-tailed distributions and slow errors. The color-category effects were successfully modeled as stimulus biases in a similarity-choice framework, in which the drift rate is the vector sum of the encoded metric and categorical representations of the stimulus. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.129 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReviewSame topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207