MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400123132 · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-49669-0

Immersive scene representation in human visual cortex with ultra-wide-angle neuroimaging

2024· article· en· W4400123132 on OpenAlexaff
Jeongho Park, Edward Soucy, Jennifer A. Segawa, R. W. Mair, Talia Konkle

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersNational Institutes of HealthHarvard UniversityNational Eye InstituteUniversity of MinnesotaU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)Computer visionDistortion (music)Artificial intelligenceVisual cortexPerceptionPeripheral visionFace (sociological concept)NeuroimagingVisual fieldNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While human vision spans 220°, traditional functional MRI setups display images only up to central 10-15°. Thus, it remains unknown how the brain represents a scene perceived across the full visual field. Here, we introduce a method for ultra-wide angle display and probe signatures of immersive scene representation. An unobstructed view of 175° is achieved by bouncing the projected image off angled-mirrors onto a custom-built curved screen. To avoid perceptual distortion, scenes are created with wide field-of-view from custom virtual environments. We find that immersive scene representation drives medial cortex with far-peripheral preferences, but shows minimal modulation in classic scene regions. Further, scene and face-selective regions maintain their content preferences even with extreme far-periphery stimulation, highlighting that not all far-peripheral information is automatically integrated into scene regions computations. This work provides clarifying evidence on content vs. peripheral preferences in scene representation and opens new avenues to research immersive vision.

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)0.000
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207