MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194370097 · doi:10.1007/s43684-021-00002-2

Lessons from human vision for robotic design

2021· article· en· W3194370097 on OpenAlexaff
Melvyn A. Goodale

Bibliographic record

VenueAutonomous Intelligent Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVision for perception and vision for actionGRASPComputer sciencePerceptionObserver (physics)Object (grammar)Posterior parietal cortexAction (physics)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionVisual perceptionCommunicationHuman–computer interactionNeurosciencePsychologyCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The visual guidance of goal-directed movements requires transformations of incoming visual information that are different from those required for visual perception. For us to grasp an object successfully, our brain must use just-in-time computations of the object’s real-world size and shape, and its orientation and disposition with respect to our hand. These requirements have led to the emergence of dedicated visuomotor modules in the posterior parietal cortex of the human brain (the dorsal visual stream) that are functionally distinct from networks in the occipito-temporal cortex (the ventral visual stream) that mediate our conscious perception of the world. Although the identification and selection of goal objects and an appropriate course of action depends on the perceptual machinery of the ventral stream and associated cognitive modules, the execution of the subsequent goal-directed action is mediated by dedicated online control systems in the dorsal stream and associated motor areas. The dorsal stream allows an observer to reach out and grasp objects with exquisite ease, but by itself, deals only with objects that are visible at the moment the action is being programmed. The ventral stream, however, allows an observer to escape the present and bring to bear information from the past – including information about the function of objects, their intrinsic properties, and their location with reference to other objects in the world. Ultimately then, both streams contribute to the production of goal-directed actions. The principles underlying this division of labour between the dorsal and ventral streams are relevant to the design and implementation of autonomous robotic systems.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutonomous Intelligent SystemsSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207