MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236413297 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/9asy8

Gaze communicates both cue direction and agent mental states

2021· preprint· en· W4236413297 on OpenAlexafffund
Florence Mayrand, Sarah D. McCrackin, Francesca Capozzi, Jelena Ristic

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGazeMental statePsychologyCognitive psychologyContent (measure theory)Mental imageSocial psychologyCognitionNeuroscienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although it is well established that humans spontaneously follow where others are looking, it remains debated if this gaze following behaviour occurs due to the gaze cue’sdirectional information (i.e., where an agent is attending) or the agent’s inferred mental state (i.e., what they are attending to). We tested this notion by assessing the combined anddissociated effects of the gaze cue direction and the agent’s mental content. Gazed-at target performance was compromised when cue direction and inferred mental content were dissociated relative to when they were combined. This effect was especially prominent for social relative to nonsocial cues. Thus, gaze signals include information about both the cue direction and the gazer’s mental content, communicating information about where gazed at items are located and what those items are.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207