MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233532015 · doi:10.1167/12.9.1321

Can shape information be transferred from hand to eye independently of semantics?

2012· article· en· W4233532015 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Pesquita, Allison Brennan, James T. Enns, Salvador Soto‐Faraco

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPriming (agriculture)Haptic technologyObject (grammar)Identity (music)PsychologyPrime (order theory)Semantics (computer science)CommunicationCognitive psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Is visual object identification influenced by haptic information from objects being explored simultaneously with the hands? Previous approaches to this question have either used familiar objects, thereby not ruling out the semantic route, or used unfamiliar objects, thus neglecting the question of how the results are related to everyday object recognition. Using an adaptation of a visual priming method (Biederman & Cooper, 1991), we compare identity with category priming to separate semantic influences from direct shape transfer in haptic-visual priming with familiar objects. Participants (n=16) manually explored an object (haptic prime) while viewing photos that progressively revealed common objects they were tasked to name. Familiar objects belonged to 8 semantic categories, each represented by 2 differently shaped objects. To address conceptually-mediated versus direct shape priming, we compared identity (haptic prime and visual target share a label and shape) and category priming (same label but different shapes). Results showed that accuracy was greater for identity than category priming (90% vs. 79%), and a shared semantic label led to greater accuracy than in unrelated and neutral conditions (71%). Detailed analyses indicated that the haptic objects did not bias responses independently of these priming effects: (1) with unrelated primes, responses associated with the held object occurred no more (7.8%) than expected by chance (12.5%), and (2) across all conditions in which the haptic prime was a potential target, participants responded with that label only 59% (optimal guessing was 67%). This demonstrates that shape can be transferred from hand to eye for familiar objects, independent of the semantic priming previously demonstrated in haptic-to-visual priming (Reales & Ballesteros, 1999). Moreover, this new methodological approach adds to recent research using non-familiar objects (Ernst et.al., 2007; Ostrovsky et.al., 2011), because it indexes the haptic-visual transfer of shape for familiar, ecologically valid, objects. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2012

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207