ArticleScientific reports2021
Deep neural network model of haptic saliency.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Data-Driven Approach for Comparing Gaze Allocation Across Conditions.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- Passive human touch cannot recognize the shape of a pattern imprinted on the fingertip.iScience · 2025Article
- Haptic search asymmetry does not occur due to different-shaped tactile symbols on capsule paper.i-PerceptionArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Haptic exploration usually involves stereotypical systematic movements that are adapted to the task. Here we tested whether exploration movements are also driven by physical stimulus features. We designed haptic stimuli, whose surface relief varied locally in spatial frequency, height, orientation, and anisotropy. In Experiment 1, participants subsequently explored two stimuli in order to decide whether they were same or different. We trained a variational autoencoder to predict the spatial distribution of touch duration from the surface relief of the haptic stimuli. The model successfully predicted where participants touched the stimuli. It could also predict participants' touch distribution from the stimulus' surface relief when tested with two new groups of participants, who performed a different task (Exp. 2) or explored different stimuli (Exp. 3). We further generated a large number of virtual surface reliefs (uniformly expressing a certain combination of features) and correlated the model's responses with stimulus properties to understand the model's preferences in order to infer which stimulus features were preferentially touched by participants. Our results indicate that haptic exploratory behavior is to some extent driven by the physical features of the stimuli, with e.g. edge-like structures, vertical and horizontal patterns, and rough regions being explored in more detail.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.