MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965679688 · doi:10.1167/12.9.1254

Pupil dilation evoked by a salient auditory stimulus facilitates saccade reaction times to a visual stimulus.

2012· article· en· W1965679688 on OpenAlexaff
Chin‐An Wang, Susan E. Boehnke, Douglas P. Munoz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)Pupillary responsePsychologySaccadic maskingPupilPupillometryAudiologySaccadeSuperior colliculusNeuroscienceEye movementCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The orienting reflex is initiated by a salient stimulus to prepare the body for quick, appropriate action. It involves a rapid shift of the eyes, attention, and other physiological responses, including pupil dynamics. The superior colliculus (SC) is a critical structure in the brain network that coordinates orienting behaviors, and we have previously shown that microstimulation of the SC in monkeys not only shifts in gaze and attention but also evokes pupil dilation. Although pupil dilation is characterized as an important component of the orienting reflex, its functional role remains poorly understood. It has been hypothesized to increase visual sensitivity. We first used a salient infrequent auditory stimulus to evoke pupil dilation. An auditory tone at zero azimuth (1000 Hz, 50 ms) was presented on only 20% of trials while monkeys fixated a central point. The pupils dilated transiently after the auditory stimulus presentation with dilation onset about 200 ms and dilation peak about 500 ms after stimulus onset, confirming that pupil dilation was triggered by auditory stimuli. Then, we presented a visual saccadic target after the auditory cue to examine the effect of evoked pupil dilation on saccadic reaction times. Critically, we manipulated the cue-target onset asynchrony (CTOA: 100-850 ms) according to the time course of evoked pupil dilation, so the size of the pupil varied at different times of target presentation. Pupils dilated maximally when the CTOA was 400 ms, the condition for which the evoked pupil size was maximal during target presentation. Moreover, saccade reaction times were negatively correlated with actual pupil size (faster reaction times occurred with a larger pupil), suggesting that pupil size influences ongoing target processing. Together, these results suggest that pupil dynamics are associated with saliency, and that stimulus-evoked pupil dilation may facilitate target processing for action. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2012

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207