Object feature reinstatement into working-memory? Separating the direct and indirect effects of long-term memory on attentional selection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During visual search, observers adopt an attentional template that guides attention towards stimuli with features that match the search-for object. This template can be bolstered by prior knowledge, even when that knowledge is irrelevant. Here, we examined how such prior knowledge in long-term memory (LTM) biases visual search both directly from a LTM-based template, and indirectly after being reinstated into a visual working memory (VWM) template. Across experiments, participants used LTM to learn a set of object images with specific colours, and then searched for the objects in any colour amongst new or old distractors. We found that for VWM-based templates, search was significantly affected by the previously learned colour association. In contrast, when search is guided directly by LTM, the effects on search time are likely related to a post-perceptual process. Altogether, this work clarifies the interactive roles of VWM and LTM in controlling attentional capture during visual search.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it