Example Drift: Uncanny Valley

A definition crowner could help sorting out some of the minor issues, like whether or not the valley can apply to animals, or humans, is it always invoked or accidental, but I have no idea how could we put the main issue into a crowner.

We agree that according to the definition, the character must look "realistic", the question is whether or not we can draw an objective line between realistic and stylized.

Even if we would ask that, as in "can we draw an objective line between realistic and stylized", that wouldn't actually give us that objective line. Scardoll even agreed that 2D art can be an example, and many of the examples he disagreed with were live action.

Here is a page action crowner instead.

I thought that since the less realistic examples all seem to be intentional examples, and the unintentional examples barely contain anything that could be called "too cartoony", we could hit two birds with one stone.

Well... it's looking like we are all pretty evenly divided so far.

There are only a few votes, I think it will work out.

And at least "Keep" is one of the leading options, so even if it stays tied, we can say that by not doing anything, we followed consensus.

edited 15th May '11 5:54:55 AM by EternalSeptember

Glad to see the crowner. Not many votes yet, but hopefully that improves.

If "Keep it" continues to be very close to "Split it", then keeping it will be easier; there needs to be a substantial lead to consider splitting. Status quo is God on tv tropes, as seen in our policy on trope names.

edited 16th May '11 6:29:06 AM by Scardoll

How much of a lead do we need to pick the winner? It seems obvious what the top option is. Do we need to wait?

EDIT: NM, the thread just needed a bump.

edited 1st Jun '11 9:55:37 AM by revolution11

• 10 (yeas:16 nays:6) 2.67 : 1

Beyond 2:1 as well as been up for 20 days and everything else is in the neg.

I would say we have a winner.

edited 31st May '11 8:25:54 PM by Raso

Seems we have a clear leader now.

Lets see if it stabilizes again.

edited 5th Jun '11 5:52:00 PM by FuschlatzOReilly

Well, the only option to go with here is the one that goes with defining Uncanny Valley the same way every other person who knows what the term means does.

[1] "This chasm—the uncanny valley of Doctor Mori’s thesis—represents the point at which a person observing the creature or object in question sees something that is nearly human, but just enough off-kilter to seem eerie or disquieting."

Everything else is misuse based on not comprehending what the concept is about, or just Round Peg Square Trope. This includes animal examples, because this deals explicitly with humans reacting to near-humans, and nothing else.

edited 14th Sep '11 5:11:04 PM by ArtemisStrong

Looks like we have a winner.

Shall we implement it then?

I think we should include The Uncanny in the definition. Doctor Mori applied the uncanny to robotics, but the principle itself can be traced back to 1906. Familiar items that aren't quite right feel worse than unfamiliar items.

That's not the trope. That's a different broader supertrope. If we try to cram too much into the definition, people shoehorn stuff in. That's why we have this issue in the first place. That's not what the trope is about. It's related, but it's not what the trope is about.

bump

Does this page need to go to the Special Efforts forum?

No. What we need is alt name crowners for the two tropes being split off.

What's wrong with running them through YKTTW?

We need names for them first and we don't move things out of TRS and into Special Efforts as a dumping ground. Threads stay open until the work is all done.

Aren't the names already in the crowner?

Do we really need another crowner to pick names?

Uncanny Valley Graphics and Uncanny Valley Character are sufficient.

Well, the problem with those names is that they aren't very clear. The tropes are as follows.

• A character's appearance falls into the Uncanny Valley because of the graphics.
• A cold, unfeeling, and inhuman personality. This trope has nothing to do with any traditional definition of the uncanny valley and is only lumped here because of a stray reference in one anime.

Both titles sound like they're the first trope. Neither sounds like the second.

edited 15th Oct '11 6:04:22 PM by shimaspawn

That was part of the debate that was settled by the crowner.

Several people (including myself) argued that Uncanny Valley can in fact refer to the second trope. You (and several others) argued it did not. We put it to a crowner and the vote was for keeping the Uncanny Valley reference for both tropes but to split them into separate tropes.

edited 15th Oct '11 11:17:14 PM by Sackett

Yes, but the crowner didn't pick the titles. Just that we're keeping both ideas as tropes. Typically split crowners just use temp titles. Misleading titles should be discouraged.

Just because both ideas are tropable doesn't mean they're both part of the Uncanny Valley and it certainly doesn't mean that they should be given misleading titles.

That was part of the crowner that they remain part of Uncanny Valley. It's clearly stated that Uncanny Valley would be a disambiguation page for these two tropes.

I don't really know what we'd call it other then Uncanny Valley Character either since that's exactly what it is. It's a character that falls into the uncanny valley. It's not misleading at all.

It seems to me you're trying to wiggle out of a crowner result that you don't like.

No, the crowner does not say that they are both part of the uncanny valley. Just as part of the split the current page becomes a disambig.

We always do alt names crowners for this sort of thing. Every single other time we've done this sort of split the steps have been:

• Write up a cohesive definition for each of the tropes being split off.
• Do an alternate names crowner for each trope.
• Split the examples in a sandbox page.
• Make the main pages and clean up the wiks.

You are trying to jump the gun because you have a certain outcome in mind.

edited 16th Oct '11 12:15:57 AM by shimaspawn

According to wikipedia; The uncanny valley is a hypothesis in the field of robotics and 3D computer animation, which holds that when human replicas look and ACT almost, but not perfectly, like actual human beings, it causes a response of revulsion among human observers. The "valley" in question is a dip in a proposed graph of the positivity of human reaction as a function of a robot's human likeness. Mori's original hypothesis states that as the appearance of a robot is made more human, a human observer's emotional response to the robot will become increasingly positive and empathic, until a point is reached beyond which the response quickly becomes that of strong revulsion. However, as the robot's appearance continues to become less distinguishable from that of a human being, the emotional response becomes positive once more and approaches human-to-human empathy levels.

This area of repulsive response aroused by a robot with appearance and motion between a "barely human" and "fully human" entity is called the uncanny valley. The name captures the idea that an almost human-looking robot will seem overly "strange" to a human being and thus will fail to evoke the empathic response required for productive human-robot interaction

by the explained definitions above behavior is part of the uncanny valley making the trope both one of appearance and/or action

with behavior being defined by the dictionary as: 1.The manner in which one behaves.

2.The actions or reactions of a person or animal in response to external or internal stimuli.

3.The manner in which something functions or operates: the faulty behavior of a computer program; the behavior of dying stars.

As such behavior has nothing to do with how(or what) one believes but rather their actions and mannerisms within a certain environment. Behavior of inhuman entities plays an important part in placing them within the uncanny valley as well as where they fit within said valley.

edited 19th Dec '11 10:55:40 PM by xanatoshatesyou