MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413113412 · doi:10.1093/nc/niaf020

Stroboscopically induced visual hallucinations: historical, phenomenological, and neurobiological perspectives

2025· review· en· W4413113412 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

VenueNeuroscience of Consciousness · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsPhenomenology (philosophy)ConsciousnessPhenomenonPsychologyNarrativeNeuroscienceCognitive scienceEpistemologyCognitive psychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exposure to rapid and bright stroboscopic light has long been reported to induce vivid visual hallucinations of colour and geometric formations. This phenomenon was first documented by Purkinje over 200 years ago. Since then, significant progress has been made in understanding the effects of stroboscopic light and the experiences it induces through multiple waves of interest from the scientific, therapeutic, and broader cultural communities. Despite these advances, fundamental questions remain unanswered, including comprehensive characterizations of its phenomenology, its precise physiological origins, under which conditions it may lead to altered states of consciousness phenomena, and potential clinical or therapeutic applications. This narrative review provides a historical summary of research into stroboscopic light stimulation (SLS) alongside its use in recreation and lay-therapeutic contexts. It also discusses the phenomenology of these experiences, current perspectives on the potential neural mechanisms of stroboscopically induced experiences, and provides an outlook for future research in this field.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.320 · 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