MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036860009 · doi:10.1002/hbm.1053

Brief visual stimulation allows mapping of ocular dominance in visual cortex using fMRI

2001· article· en· W2036860009 on OpenAlexaff
Bradley G. Goodyear, Ravi S. Menon

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
FundersNational Eye InstituteMedical Research CouncilNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsVisual cortexFunctional magnetic resonance imagingOcular dominance columnStimulus (psychology)NeuroscienceStimulationPsychologyOcular dominanceHaemodynamic responsePhotic StimulationVisual perceptionMedicineCognitive psychologyPerceptionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have used high spatial resolution (0.55 mm x 0.55 mm) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that when stimulus duration is brief (<6 sec), the hyperoxic hemodynamic response to neural activity can resolve the columnar architecture of ocular dominance within the primary visual cortex of humans. Our fMRI maps of ocular dominance columns are strikingly similar in appearance, size, and orientation to those reported in the literature using optical imaging of intrinsic signals (OIS) in animal cortex and histology of post-mortem human specimens. We also demonstrate that under brief visual stimulation conditions, our results are consistent over repeated experiments. This is not the case for long duration stimuli (> or = 10 sec). A simulated random data set exhibited the same response properties as maps obtained when using these prolonged visual stimuli. Our results suggest that brief visual stimulation is essential for fMRI to successfully resolve ocular dominance columns using the hyperoxic phase of the hemodynamic response to neural activity at our prescribed spatial resolution.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations149
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207