Neural Correlates of Perceptual Grouping Under Conditions of Inattention and Divided Attention
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Grouping local elements of the visual environment together is crucial for meaningful perception. While our attentional system facilitates perception, it is limited in that we are unaware of some aspects of our environment that can still influence how we experience it. In this study, the neural mechanisms underlying the Ponzo illusion were examined under inattention and divided-attention conditions using functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the brain regions responsible for accessing visual stimuli. A line discrimination task was performed in which two horizontal lines were superimposed on a background of black and white dots that, on occasion, induced the Ponzo illusion if perceptually grouped together. Our findings revealed activation for perceptual grouping in the frontal, parietal, and occipital regions of the brain and activation in the bilateral frontal, temporal, and cingulate gyrus in response to divided attention compared with inattention trials. A direct comparison between grouping and attention showed involvement of the right supramarginal gyrus in grouping specifically under conditions of inattention, suggesting that even during implicit grouping complex visual processing occurs. Given that much of the visual world is not represented in conscious perception, these findings provide crucial information about how we make sense of visual scenes in the world.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it