Preserved motion processing and visuomotor control in a patient with large bilateral lesions of occipitotemporal cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to Goodale and Milner, visual perception is mediated by the ventral stream and the visual control of action by the dorsal stream of cortical visual projections. The initial neuropsychological evidence for this idea was based strongly on a single case, DF, who has impaired object recognition but spared visual control of grasping, consistent with lesions to lateral occipital (LO) cortex but intact dorsal-stream processing. Here we present data from a new patient, MC, a 38-year-old woman who shows very similar behaviour to DF despite much more extensive bilateral occipitotemporal lesions that encompass not only LO but most of early visual cortex in the occipital lobe, except for a small tag of tissue in the rostral calcarine cortex (Culham et al., VSS 2008). MC shows some preserved motion perception, but is unable to identify line drawings (or real exemplars) of common objects or discriminate colours or visual textures. Not surprisingly, MC cannot discriminate between rectangular objects with different dimensions; nor can she indicate their width manually. Remarkably, however, when she reaches out to grasp such objects, her in-flight grasp scales to the object's size. Similarly, even though MC cannot discriminate between objects of varying shape, she chooses stable grasp points on those objects when she reaches out to pick them up. The case of MC not only reinforces the conclusions about separate visual processing for perception and action drawn from DF, but also suggests that visuomotor mechanisms in the dorsal stream are capable of mediating the processing of object features such as size, shape, and orientation for the control of visually guided grasping even with highly impoverished (or perhaps entirely absent) input from the ventral stream and early visual areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".