Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2025

Postural Organization of Gait Initiation for Biomechanical Analysis Using Force Platform Recordings
Published on: July 26, 2022
Object geometry serves humans' intuitive physics of stability
Yaxin Liu1, Vladislav Ayzenberg2, Stella F Lourenco3
1Emory University, 36 Eagle Row, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA. yaxin.liu@emory.edu.
Abstract:
How do humans judge physical stability? A prevalent account emphasizes the mental simulation of physical events implemented by an intuitive physics engine in the mind. Here we test the extent to which the perceptual features of object geometry are sufficient for supporting judgments of falling direction. In all experiments, adults and children judged the falling direction of a tilted object and, across experiments, objects differed in the geometric features (i.e., geometric centroid, object height, base size and/or aspect ratio) relevant to the judgment. Participants' performance was compared to computational models trained on geometric features, as well as a deep convolutional neural network (ResNet-50), none of which incorporated mental simulation. Adult and child participants' performance was well fit by models of object geometry, particularly the geometric centroid. ResNet-50 also provided a good account of human performance. Altogether, our findings suggest that object geometry may be sufficient for judging the falling direction of tilted objects, independent of mental simulation.
Related Concept Videos
Stability of structures
Internal Forces and Center of Gravity
Internal forces are generated within a body due to the interaction between its particles. These forces can be categorized into tension, compression, and...
Stability of Equilibrium Configuration: Problem Solving
Problem-solving in the context of the stability of equilibrium configuration...
Center of Gravity
To determine its location, the principle of moments can be utilized by dividing the...
Oscillations about an Equilibrium Position
Rigid Body Equilibrium Problems - II
Consider two children sitting on a seesaw, which has negligible mass. The first child has a mass (m1) of 26 kg and sits at point A, which is 1.6 meters (r1) from the pivot point B; the second child has a mass (m2) of 32 kg and sits at point C. How far from the pivot point B should the second child sit (r2) to balance the seesaw?

