MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161117886 · doi:10.1177/0956797620984464

The Foreground Bias: Initial Scene Representations Across the Depth Plane

2021· article· en· W3161117886 on OpenAlexafffund
Monica S. Castelhano

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science
KeywordsScene statisticsObserver (physics)PerceptionComputer visionArtificial intelligenceFixation (population genetics)PsychologyComputer scienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When you walk into a large room, you perceive visual information that is both close to you in depth and farther in the background. Here, we investigated how initial scene representations are affected by information across depth. We examined the role of background and foreground information on scene gist by using chimera scenes (images with a foreground and background from different scene categories). Across three experiments, we found a foreground bias: Information in the foreground initially had a strong influence on the interpretation of the scene. This bias persisted when the initial fixation position was on the scene background and when the task was changed to emphasize scene information. We concluded that the foreground bias arises from initial processing of scenes for understanding and suggests that scene information closer to the observer is initially prioritized. We discuss the implications for theories of scene and depth perception.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.287
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ScienceSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207