MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997183875 · doi:10.1152/jn.00389.2012

Spatiotemporal structure of visual receptive fields in macaque superior colliculus

2012· article· en· W1997183875 on OpenAlexafffund
Jan Churan, Daniel Guitton, Christopher C. Pack

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsReceptive fieldMacaqueSuperior colliculusNeuroscienceSuperior ColliculiVisual systemCommunicationVisual cortexPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saccades are useful for directing the high-acuity fovea to visual targets that are of behavioral relevance. The selection of visual targets for eye movements involves the superior colliculus (SC), where many neurons respond to visual stimuli. Many of these neurons are also activated before and during saccades of specific directions and amplitudes. Although the role of the SC in controlling eye movements has been thoroughly examined, far less is known about the nature of the visual responses in this area. We have, therefore, recorded from neurons in the intermediate layers of the macaque SC, while using a sparse-noise mapping procedure to obtain a detailed characterization of the spatiotemporal structure of visual receptive fields. We find that SC responses to flashed visual stimuli start roughly 50 ms after the onset of the stimulus and last for on average ~70 ms. About 50% of these neurons are strongly suppressed by visual stimuli flashed at certain locations flanking the excitatory center, and the spatiotemporal pattern of suppression exerts a predictable influence on the timing of saccades. This suppression may, therefore, contribute to the filtering of distractor stimuli during target selection. We also find that saccades affect the processing of visual stimuli by SC neurons in a manner that is quite similar to the saccadic suppression and postsaccadic enhancement that has been observed in the cortex and in perception. However, in contrast to what has been observed in the cortex, decreased visual sensitivity was generally associated with increased firing rates, while increased sensitivity was associated with decreased firing rates. Overall, these results suggest that the processing of visual stimuli by SC receptive fields can influence oculomotor behavior and that oculomotor signals originating in the SC can shape perisaccadic visual perception.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207