MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

fMRI Repetition Suppression for Familiar But Not Arbitrary Actions with Tools

2012· article· en· W2035561054 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

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAffordanceAction (physics)Repetition (rhetorical device)Computer scienceObject (grammar)Perspective (graphical)Cognitive psychologyPremotor cortexPsychologyHuman–computer interactionCognitive scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For humans, daily life is characterized by routine interaction with many different tools for which corresponding actions are specified and performed according to well-learned procedures. The current study used functional MRI (fMRI) repetition suppression (RS) to identify brain areas underlying the transformation of visually defined tool properties to corresponding motor programs for conventional use. Before grasping and demonstrating how to use a specific tool, participants passively viewed either the same (repeated) tool or a different (non-repeated) tool. Repetition of tools led to reduced fMRI signals (RS) within a selective network of parietal and premotor areas. Comparison with newly learned, arbitrarily defined control actions revealed specificity of RS for tool use, thought to reflect differences in the extent of previous sensorimotor experience. The findings indicate that familiar tools are visually represented within the same sensorimotor areas underlying their dexterous use according to learned properties defined by previous experience. This interpretation resonates with the broader concept of affordance specification considered fundamental to action planning and execution whereby action-relevant object properties (affordances) are visually represented in sensorimotor areas. The current findings extend this view to reveal that affordance specification in humans includes learned object properties defined by previous sensorimotor experience. From an evolutionary perspective, the neural mechanisms identified in the current study offer clear survival advantage, providing fast efficient transformation of visual information to appropriate motor responses based on previous experience.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.230 · 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