ReviewProceedings. Biological sciences2025
Characterizing internal models of the visual environment.
Review in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Synthesis and perceptual scaling of high-resolution naturalistic images using Stable Diffusion.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the complexity of real-world environments, natural vision is seamlessly efficient. To explain this efficiency, researchers often use predictive processing frameworks, in which perceptual efficiency is determined by the match between the visual input and internal models of what the world should look like. In scene vision, predictions derived from our internal models of a scene should play a particularly important role, given the highly reliable statistical structure of our environment. Despite their importance for scene perception, we still do not fully understand what is contained in our internal models of the environment. Here, we highlight that the current literature disproportionately focuses on an experimental approach that tries to infer the contents of internal models from arbitrary, experimenter-driven manipulations in stimulus characteristics. To make progress, additional participant-driven approaches are needed, focusing on participants' descriptions of what constitutes a typical scene. We discuss how recent studies on memory and perception used methods like line drawings to characterize internal representations in unconstrained ways and on the level of individual participants. These emerging methods show that it is now time to also study natural scene perception from a different angle-starting with a characterization of an individual's expectations about the world.
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.