MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4323316364 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/5skr2

Visual perception is highly flexible and context-dependent in young infants: A case of top-down modulated motion perception

2023· preprint· en· W4323316364 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Naiqi G. Xiao, Lauren L. Emberson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthJames S. McDonnell Foundation
KeywordsPerceptionContext (archaeology)Motion (physics)CognitionPsychologyMotion perceptionCognitive psychologyVisual perceptionModulation (music)Time perceptionPerceptual learningCommunicationComputer scienceNeuroscienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsBiologyAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Top-down modulation is an essential cognitive component in human perception. Despite mounting evidence of top-down perceptual modulation in adults, it is largely unknown whether infants can engage in this cognitive function. Here, we examined top-down modulation of motion perception in six- to eight-month-old infants via their smooth pursuit eye movements. With four experiments, we demonstrated that infants’ perception of motion direction can be flexibly shaped by briefly learned predictive cues when no coherent motion was available. The current findings present a novel view of infant perception and its development: Infant perceptual systems respond to predictive signals engendered from higher-level learning systems, leading to a flexible and context-dependent modulation of perception. This work also suggested that the infant brain is sophisticated, interconnected, and active when placed in a context where it can learn and predict.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanisms→French-language works237,207→