Testing the two-stream hypothesis in an immersive virtual environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A great deal of behavioural research has gone into a proposed distinction between two separate streams for visual processing, vision for action and vision for perception.Research on perceptual and geometric illusions has gone a long way in determining this proposed dissociation in visual processing.These illusions fool the brain into misjudging object sizes but at the same time do not affect fingers from scaling to the correct size while grabbing.This effect is maintained even when the stimuli are three-dimensional.The mechanisms mediating the visual control of object-oriented actions are thought to operate in egocentric coordinates.We would therefore like to know whether this effect is maintained when reaching for the illusion with a virtual arm, where there is an indirect pairing of visual and proprioceptive feedback, a process essential for pairing the external visual scene onto egocentric coordinates.Our research shows that while the two stream effect is maintained in a real world, it is lost out in a virtual world where there is a lack of haptic feedback.It is also seen that participants underestimate depth unless given an external feedback, in our case, a change of colour in the virtual arm within a virtual environment with a depth grid. SommaireUne grande partie de la recherche comportementale consiste d'une distinction proposée entre deux flux distincts pour le traitement visuel, la vision pour l'action et la vision pour la perception.La recherche sur les illusions perceptives et géométriques a parcouru un long chemin vers la détermination de cette proposition de la dissociation du traitement visuel.Ces illusions trompent le cerveau à mal juger les tailles des objets, tout sans empêchant les doigts de mettre à l'échelle les tailles correctes alors qu'ils saisissent ces objects.Cet effet persiste même quand les stimuli sont en trois dimensions.Les mécanismes qui facilitent le contrôle visuel des actions sur objects sont soupçonnés de fonctionner en coordonnées égocentriques.Nous aimerions donc savoir si cet effet persiste quand on essait d'atteindre l'illusion en utilisant bras virtuel, où si il existe un couplage indirect entre le visuel et la rétroaction proprioceptive, un processus essentiel pour la superimposition de la scène visuelle externe sur les coordonnées égocentriques.Notre recherche montre que, bien que l'effet de deux flux est maintenu dans le monde réel, il est perdu dans un monde virtuel où la rétroaction haptique est absente.Il est également observé que les participants sousestiment la profondeur, à moins qu'une rétroaction externe est donnée, comme, dans notre cas, un changement de couleur dans le bras virtuel dans un environnement virtuel avec une grille de profondeurs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".