Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39775721›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2025

Salience maps for judgments of frontal plane distance, centroids, numerosity, and letter identity inferred from substance-invariant processing.

Lingyu Gan, George Sperling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lingyu GanDepartment of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine, California, USA.
George SperlingDepartment of Cognitive Sciences and Neurobiology and Behavior, University of California, Irvine, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A salience map is a topographic map that has inputs at each x,y location from many different feature maps and summarizes the combined salience of all those inputs as a real number, salience, which is represented in the map. Of the more than 1 million Google references to salience maps, nearly all use the map for computing the relative priority of visual image components for subsequent processing. We observe that salience processing is an instance of substance-invariant processing, analogous to household measuring cups, weight scales, and measuring tapes, all of which make single-number substance-invariant measurements. Like these devices, the brain also collects material for substance-invariant measurements but by a different mechanism: salience maps that collect visual substances for subsequent measurement. Each salience map can be used by many different measurements. The instruction to attend is implemented by increasing the salience of the to-be-attended items so they can be collected in a salience map and then further processed. Here we show that, beyond processing priority, the following measurement tasks are substance invariant and therefore use salience maps: computing distance in the frontal plane, computing centroids (center of a cluster of items), computing the numerosity of a collection of items, and identifying alphabetic letters. We painstakingly demonstrate that defining items exclusively by color or texture not only is sufficient for these tasks, but that light-dark luminance information significantly improves performance only for letter recognition. Obviously, visual features are represented in the brain but their salience alone is sufficient for these four judgments.

Indexed as

JudgmentPattern Recognition, VisualAdultAttentionFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39775721
PMCPMC11724370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.