Additional file 1 of The functional role of spatial anisotropies in ensemble perception

Additional file 1. Supplementary analysis of Experiment 3. Fig. S1. Grayscale representation of raw weights (model coefficients) from the spatial weighted average model for the three duration conditions of Experiment 3. The spatial anisotropies, notably the central bias, exhibit stability and consistency across different stimulus durations, with white indicating larger weights. Fig. S2. Model results using spatial anisotropy from the 100 ms condition (training) to predict single-trial errors in the 100 ms, 500 ms, and 1000 ms conditions (tests) through cross-validation (5-fold). Each individual subject is represented by open blue, red, and green circles for the 100, 500, and 1000 ms conditions, respectively, with evaluation based on the correlation between predicted and observed single-trial errors in the left-out data of the same subject (averaging cross-validation folds). This supplementary analysis aims to determine if variance in longer duration conditions can be explained by anisotropy in the 100 ms condition, indicating minimal influence of differential eye movements due to longer stimulus durations on the results. The average model performance remains consistent across duration conditions, significantly exceeding chance levels (open gray circles and bars, illustrating the median and upper and lower 99th quantiles of correlations obtained by shuffling observed errors across trials). Consequently, spatial maps derived from the 100 ms stimulus duration demonstrate stability and consistency as stimulus duration increases, and exhibit the ability to predict single-trial errors at other durations with the same model performance