Electrophysiological priming effects demonstrate independence and overlap of visual regularity representations in the extrastriate cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Event Related Potential (ERP) component called the Sustained Posterior Negativity (SPN) is generated by regular visual patterns (e.g. vertical reflectional symmetry, horizontal reflectional symmetry or rotational symmetry). Behavioural studies suggest symmetry becomes increasingly salient when the exemplars update rapidly. In line with this, Experiment 1 (N = 48) found that SPN amplitude increased when three different reflectional symmetry patterns were presented sequentially. We call this effect 'SPN priming'. We then exploited SPN priming to investigate independence of different symmetry representations. SPN priming did not survive changes in retinal location (Experiment 2, N = 48) or non-orthogonal changes in axis orientation (Experiment 3, N = 48). However, SPN priming transferred between vertical and horizontal axis orientations (Experiment 4, N = 48) and between reflectional and rotational symmetry (Experiment 5, N = 48). SPN priming is interesting in itself, and a useful new method for identifying functional boundaries of the symmetry response. We conclude that visual regularities at different retinal locations are coded independently. However, there is some overlap between different regularities presented at the same retinal location.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".