MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389940982 · doi:10.1177/23727322231220494

Designing for Sensory Adaptation: What You See Depends on What You’ve Been Looking at - Recommendations, Guidelines and Standards Should Reflect This

2023· article· en· W4389940982 on OpenAlexaff
Mohana Kuppuswamy Parthasarathy, Margarita L. Zuley, Andriy I. Bandos, Lorne Whitehead, Craig K. Abbey

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Eye InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPerceptionPsychologyStimulus (psychology)Cognitive psychologySensory systemAdaptation (eye)Affect (linguistics)Social psychologyCommunicationNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensory systems continuously recalibrate their responses according to the current stimulus environment. As a result, perception is strongly affected by the current and recent context. These adaptative changes affect both sensitivity (e.g., habituating to noise, seeing better in the dark) and appearance (e.g., how things look, what catches attention) and adjust to many perceptual properties (e.g., from light level to the characteristics of someone's face). They therefore have a profound effect on most perceptual experiences, and on how well the senses work in different settings. Characterizing the properties of adaptation, how it manifests, and when it influences perception in modern environments can provide insights into the diversity of human experience. Adaptation could also be leveraged both to optimize perceptual abilities (e.g., in visual inspection tasks like radiology) and to mitigate unwanted consequences (e.g., exposure to potentially unhealthy stimulus environments).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.450
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.030 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain SciencesSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207