Saccades during Object Viewing Modulate Oscillatory Phase in the Superior Temporal Sulcus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Saccadic eye movements (SEMs) are the primary means of gating visual information in primates and strongly influence visual perception. The active exploration of the visual environment ("active vision") via SEMs produces suppression during saccades and enhancement afterward (i.e., during fixation) in occipital visual areas. In lateral temporal lobe visual areas, the influence, if any, of eye movements is less well understood, despite the necessity of these areas for forming coherent percepts of objects. The upper bank of the superior temporal sulcus (uSTS) is one such area whose sensitivity to SEMs is unknown. We therefore examined how saccades modulate local field potentials (LFPs) in the uSTS of macaque monkeys while they viewed face and nonface object stimuli. LFP phase concentration increased following fixation onset in the alpha (8-14 Hz), beta (14-30 Hz), and gamma (30-60 Hz) bands and was distinct from the image-evoked response. Furthermore, near-coincident onsets of fixation and image presentation--like those occurring in active vision--led to enhanced responses through greater phase concentration in the same frequency bands. Finally, single-unit activity was modulated by the phase of alpha, beta, and gamma oscillations, suggesting that the observed phase-locking influences spike timing in uSTS. Previous research implicates phase concentration in these frequency bands as a correlate of perceptual performance (Womelsdorf et al., 2006; Bosman et al., 2009). Together, these results demonstrate sensitivity to eye movements in an object-processing region of the brain and represent a plausible neural basis for the enhancement of object processing during active vision.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".