Single-Trial Decoding of Visual Attention from Local Field Potentials in the Primate Lateral Prefrontal Cortex Is Frequency-Dependent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Local field potentials (LFPs) are fluctuations of extracellular voltage that may reflect the physiological phenomena occurring within a volume of neural tissue. It is known that the allocation of spatial attention modulates the amplitude of LFPs in visual areas of primates. An issue that remains poorly investigated is whether and how attention modulates LFPs in executive brain areas, such as the lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC), thought to be involved in the origins of attention. We addressed this issue by recording LFPs from multielectrode arrays implanted in the LPFC of two macaques. We found that the allocation of attention can be reliably decoded on a single-trial basis from ensembles of LFPs with frequencies >60 Hz. Using LFP frequencies <60 Hz, we could not decode the allocation of attention, but we could decode the location of a visual stimulus as well as the endpoint of saccades toward that stimulus. The information contained in the high-frequency LFPs was fully redundant with the information contained in the spiking activity of single neurons recorded from the same electrodes. Moreover, the decoding of attention using γ frequency LFPs was less accurate than using spikes, but it was twice more stable across time. Finally, decorrelating the LFP signals from the different electrodes increased decoding performance in the high frequencies by up to ∼14%. Our findings suggest that LFPs recorded from chronically implanted multielectrode arrays in the LPFC contain information about sensory, cognitive, and motor components of a task in a frequency-dependent manner.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".