Probing basal ganglia functions by saccade eye movements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The basal ganglia (BG) are a group of subcortical structures involved in diverse functions, such as motor, cognition and emotion. However, the BG do not control these functions directly, but rather modulate functional processes occurring in structures outside the BG. The BG form multiple functional loops, each of which controls different functions with similar architectures. Accordingly, to understand the modulatory role of the BG, it is strategic to uncover the mechanisms of signal processing within specific functional loops that control simple neural circuits outside the BG, and then extend the knowledge to other BG loops. The saccade control system is one of the best-understood neural circuits in the brain. Furthermore, sophisticated saccade paradigms have been used extensively in clinical research in patients with BG disorders as well as in basic research in behaving monkeys. In this review, we describe recent advances of BG research from the viewpoint of saccade control. Specifically, we account for experimental results from neuroimaging and clinical studies in humans based on the updated knowledge of BG functions derived from neurophysiological experiments in behaving monkeys by taking advantage of homologies in saccade behavior. It has become clear that the traditional BG network model for saccade control is too limited to account for recent evidence emerging from the roles of subcortical nuclei not incorporated in the model. Here, we extend the traditional model and propose a new hypothetical framework to facilitate clinical and basic BG research and dialogue in the future.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".