ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Probing the link between vision and language in material perception using psychophysics and unsupervised learning.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Material fictions: Comparing physically based renderings and generative AI images through material perception.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Sequential sensitivity analysis of multimodal large language models for rare orbital disease detection.Communications medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We can visually discriminate and recognize a wide range of materials. Meanwhile, we use language to describe what we see and communicate relevant information about the materials. Here, we investigate the relationship between visual judgment and language expression to understand how visual features relate to semantic representations in human cognition. We use deep generative models to generate images of realistic materials. Interpolating between the generative models enables us to systematically create material appearances in both well-defined and ambiguous categories. Using these stimuli, we compared the representations of materials from two behavioral tasks: visual material similarity judgments and free-form verbal descriptions. Our findings reveal a moderate but significant correlation between vision and language on a categorical level. However, analyzing the representations with an unsupervised alignment method, we discover structural differences that arise at the image-to-image level, especially among ambiguous materials morphed between known categories. Moreover, visual judgments exhibit more individual differences compared to verbal descriptions. Our results show that while verbal descriptions capture material qualities on the coarse level, they may not fully convey the visual nuances of material appearances. Analyzing the image representation of materials obtained from various pre-trained deep neural networks, we find that similarity structures in human visual judgments align more closely with those of the vision-language models than purely vision-based models. Our work illustrates the need to consider the vision-language relationship in building a comprehensive model for material perception. Moreover, we propose a novel framework for evaluating the alignment and misalignment between representations from different modalities, leveraging information from human behaviors and computational models.
Indexed as
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.