Object-based warping in three-dimensional environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Object-based warping is a powerful visual illusion wherein space between features within figural regions is regularly overestimated compared with those within ground regions. Originally, the effect was only examined in displays of two-dimensional (2D) stimuli. The present study sought to examine whether object-based warping persists in more naturalistic viewing conditions, where additional contextual cues are present. Stimuli were presented with either three-dimensional (3D) printed objects (Experiment 1) or 3D objects in virtual reality (Experiments 2-4). The testing metric was actual distance of features (dots) compared with estimated distances made by participants. Responses for the 3D printed stimuli were measured with replica dots on a slide ruler device. The virtual reality experiments collected responses either with a computer mouse or motion-tracked controller and included manipulations of object type, spatial separation, viewing distance of stimuli, and head motion. A standard warping effect in 3D was observed in all experiments, although the effect was not present in one condition that elicits warping in 2D (Occluded Rectangle). The final experiment resolves this discrepancy by reducing the multicomponent object (Occluded Rectangle) to a single component figure, while demonstrating the influence of depth cues on the warping effect under occlusion. Collectively, these experiments reveal that object-based warping is a powerful effect, even in naturalistic settings.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".