MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402905815 · doi:10.1167/jov.24.10.1321

Spatial Tuning of Visual Responses to Symmetries in Textures

2024· article· en· W4402905815 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomogeneous spaceGeologyPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symmetry is a biologically significant visual feature that relies on the perceptual grouping of spatially separate elements. Symmetry has been shown to play a role in numerous domains of visual perception in both humans and other animals. Brain imaging studies have revealed that several regions in the visual cortex exhibit robust and precise responses to symmetry. Here we explored the spatial mechanisms that mediate symmetry perception by measuring Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials using high-density EEG. Our stimuli were taken from a class of regular textures, known as wallpaper groups – a set of 17 unique combinations of symmetry types that represent the complete set of symmetries in 2D images. We focused on groups PMM, which contains reflection symmetry, and P4, which contains four-fold rotation symmetry, and generated exemplars from each group based on log-domain band-limited random noise patches. This approach allows us to manipulate both the spatial frequency content of the exemplars, and the scale of the lattice structure that is repeated to tile the plane in all wallpaper groups. Across 8 conditions, we varied spatial frequency between 1 to 8 cycles-per-degree (centre frequency of the noise patch), and the lattice scale between 1/12 and ½ (relative size of lattice to overall wallpaper). Consistent with previous studies we found that symmetry-specific responses were weaker overall for rotation compared to reflection. However, responses also exhibited clear evidence of spatial tuning, with low spatial frequency and small scale lattices generally producing the biggest responses for both wallpaper groups. Interestingly, reflection (PMM) and rotation (P4) symmetry elicited clearly distinct response patterns across the spatial frequencies and lattice scales, suggesting that the two symmetry types rely on distinct cortical mechanisms. Future studies will relate these findings to responses in distinct areas along the human visual processing hierarchy.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.341 · 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