MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999491265 · doi:10.1037/a0016826

The optic tectum of birds: Mapping our way to understanding visual processing.

2009· review· en· W1999491265 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsRetinotopySuperior colliculusNeuroscienceTectumOptic tectumSuperior ColliculiVisual systemVisual cortexVisual processingBiologyExtrastriate cortexRetinaMidbrainCentral nervous systemPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past few decades there has been a massive amount of research on the geniculo-striate visual system in primates. However, studies of the avian visual system have provided a rich source of data contributing to our understanding of visual processing. In this paper we review the connectivity and function of the optic tectum (homolog of the superior colliculus) in birds. We highlight the retinotopic projections that the optic tectum has with the isthmal nuclei, and the functional topographic projections that the optic tectum has with the nucleus rotundus and entopallium (homologs of the pulvinar and extrastriate cortex, respectively) where retinotopy has been sacrificed. This work has been critical in our understanding of basic visual processes including attention, parallel processing, and the binding problem.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.200 · 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