Gabor frames from contact geometry in models of the primary visual cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyze the interplay between contact geometry and Gabor filters signal analysis in geometric models of the primary visual cortex. We show in particular that a specific framed lattice and an associated Gabor system is determined by the Legendrian circle bundle structure of the $3$-manifold of contact elements on a surface (which models the V1-cortex), together with the presence of an almost-complex structure on the tangent bundle of the surface (which models the retinal surface). We identify a scaling of the lattice, also dictated by the manifold geometry, that ensures the frame condition is satisfied. We then consider a $5$-dimensional model where receptor profiles also involve a dependence on frequency and scale variables, in addition to the dependence on position and orientation. In this case we show that a proposed profile window function does not give rise to frames (even in a distributional sense), while a natural modification of the same generates Gabor frames with respect to the appropriate lattice determined by the contact geometry. Comment: LaTeX, 33 pages (v2: expanded introduction, v3: typos correction and short explanatory comments added; v4: journal overlay published version)
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".