ArticleiScience2026
Tracing aesthetic experience from perception and conception to appraisal using deep convolutional neural networks.
Article in iScience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aesthetic experience is a multi-level process, yet current theoretical models do not link the different components within a unified framework. Here, we use human-aligned deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) to capture these components and probe their underlying mechanisms. We show that a recently proposed DCNN-based integration metric-reflecting reduced representational complexity-strongly predicts perceptual fluency of paintings. This effect peaks in early layers and for fine spatial detail, with distinct layers aligning to different fluency-related features, indicating stage-specific mechanisms. However, this perceptually grounded metric predicts liking less accurately, indicating a partial dissociation between fluency and liking. Contrastingly, deeper layers capture higher-level conceptual information (e.g., style), and ridge regression on layer-wise activations predicts liking more accurately, with performance increasing across depth. Domain comparisons further reveal distinct layer and spatial-scale dependencies for paintings versus natural scenes. Together, layer-resolved DCNN modeling offers a principled framework for tracing the multiple stages of aesthetic appreciation.
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.