Spatial transformations between superior colliculus visual and motor response fields during head‐unrestrained gaze shifts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously reported that visuomotor activity in the superior colliculus (SC)--a key midbrain structure for the generation of rapid eye movements--preferentially encodes target position relative to the eye (Te) during low-latency head-unrestrained gaze shifts (DeSouza et al., 2011). Here, we trained two monkeys to perform head-unrestrained gaze shifts after a variable post-stimulus delay (400-700 ms), to test whether temporally separated SC visual and motor responses show different spatial codes. Target positions, final gaze positions and various frames of reference (eye, head, and space) were dissociated through natural (untrained) trial-to-trial variations in behaviour. 3D eye and head orientations were recorded, and 2D response field data were fitted against multiple models by use of a statistical method reported previously (Keith et al., 2009). Of 60 neurons, 17 showed a visual response, 12 showed a motor response, and 31 showed both visual and motor responses. The combined visual response field population (n = 48) showed a significant preference for Te, which was also preferred in each visual subpopulation. In contrast, the motor response field population (n = 43) showed a preference for final (relative to initial) gaze position models, and the Te model was statistically eliminated in the motor-only population. There was also a significant shift of coding from the visual to motor response within visuomotor neurons. These data confirm that SC response fields are gaze-centred, and show a target-to-gaze transformation between visual and motor responses. Thus, visuomotor transformations can occur between, and even within, neurons within a single frame of reference and brain structure.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".