Sentence examples for motion coherence detectors from inspiring English sources

This would appear consistent with Levy et al. [ 30] who showed that good motion coherence detectors were better at classifying words as real words rather than nonwords compared with poor motion coherence detectors.

Object presentation manipulated to purportedly reduce dorsal stream activation and parietofrontal attention mechanisms, was expected to not show any differences between good and poor motion coherence detectors.

They decided that either motion coherence was to the right, to the left, or that there was no motion coherence.

In addition, subjects were told that a trial may or may not contain motion coherence, and that in those that contained motion coherence, this coherence level could begin to increase at any time during the trial.

The other trials were evenly divided (29% each) between 'baseline' trials, in which motion remained random (0% coherence) throughout the trial, and trials in which motion coherence rose quickly (2%/s coherence rate) at trial onset.

If motion coherence was not detected, subjects were instructed to withhold responding.

There was greater pre-response activity with the accuracy condition than there was with the speed condition when the motion coherence signal was present (coherence trials).

Visual stimuli were dynamic dot patterns of low motion coherence, presented at three levels of coherence tailored to each subject (see Stimulus Levels, below).

Yet, only improved averaging explains developments in motion coherence sensitivity.

In the motion coherence task, dots moved with 100% coherence 90° leftward or rightward of vertical.

It is not clear exactly how much internal noise would be needed to limit motion coherence thresholds, as there is no ideal observer model for motion coherence.