MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Separate Visual Signals for Saccade Initiation during Target Selection in the Primate Superior Colliculus

2011· article· en· W1988908470 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian J. White, Douglas P. Munoz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChromatic scaleAchromatic lensSaccadeChromaticityLuminanceSuperior colliculusSaccadic maskingParvocellular cellColor visionPsychologyNeurosciencePrimateEye movementCommunicationArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary function of the superior colliculus (SC) is to orient the visual system toward behaviorally relevant stimuli defined by features such as color. However, a longstanding view has held that visual activity in the SC arises exclusively from achromatic pathways. Recently, we reported evidence that the primate SC is highly sensitive to signals originating from chromatic pathways, but these signals are delayed relative to luminance signals (White et al., 2009). Here, we describe a functional consequence of this difference in visual arrival time on the processes leading to target selection and saccade initiation. Two rhesus monkeys performed a simple color-singleton selection task in which stimuli carried a chromatic component only (target and distractors were isoluminant with the background, but differed in chromaticity) or a combined chromatic-achromatic component (36% luminance contrast added equally to all stimuli). Although visual responses were delayed in the chromatic-only relative to the combined chromatic-achromatic condition, SC neurons discriminated the target from distractors at approximately the same time provided stimulus chromaticity was held constant. However, saccades were triggered sooner, and with more errors, with the chromatic-achromatic condition, suggesting that luminance signals associated with these stimuli increased the probability of triggering a saccade before the target color was adequately discriminated. These results suggest that separate mechanisms may independently influence the saccadic command in the SC, one linked to the arrival time of pertinent visual signals, and another linked to the output of the visual selection process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations43
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanisms→French-language works237,207→