MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069560376 · doi:10.1152/jn.00386.2007

Widespread Presaccadic Recruitment of Neck Muscles by Stimulation of the Primate Frontal Eye Fields

2007· article· en· W2069560376 on OpenAlexaff
James K. Elsley, Benjamin Nagy, Sharon L. Cushing, Brian D. Corneil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGazeNeuroscienceFrontal eye fieldsStimulationSuperior colliculusEye movementPsychologyPrimateSupplementary eye fieldPhotic StimulationElectromyographySaccadic maskingAnatomySaccadeVisual perceptionMedicinePerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied the role of the primate frontal eye fields (FEFs) in eye-head gaze shifts by recording EMG activity from multiple dorsal neck muscles after electrical stimulation of a broad distribution of sites throughout FEF. We assess our results in light of four mechanisms forwarded to account for why eye and head movements follow FEF stimulation. Two mechanisms propose that movements are generated indirectly by FEF stimulation in response to either a percept or an eccentric orbital position. Two other mechanisms propose that movements are evoked directly through the issuance of either a gaze command or separate eye and head commands. FEF stimulation evoked short-latency ( approximately 20 ms) neck EMG responses from the vast majority (>95%) of stimulation sites. Evoked responses usually preceded the gaze shift by approximately 20 ms, even for small gaze shifts (<10 degrees ) not typically associated with head motion. Evoked responses began earlier and attained a larger magnitude when accompanied by larger gaze shifts and took a form consistent with the recruitment of the appropriately directed head movements to accompany the evoked gaze shift. We also observed robust neck EMG even when stimulation failed to evoke a gaze shift and occasionally observed head-only movements when the head was unrestrained. These results resemble neck EMG evoked from the superior colliculus (SC). Neck EMG response latencies approached the minimal conduction time to the motor periphery and hence are not consistent with either of the indirect mechanisms. The widespread nature of the cephalomotor drive from the FEF, the scaling of neck EMG responses with gaze magnitude, and the consistently earlier generation of the EMG versus gaze response are difficult to reconcile with suggestions that separate FEF channels encode eye and head motion independently. The most parsimonious interpretation is that a gaze command issued by the FEF is decomposed into eye and head commands downstream of the SC. The relative timing of the neck EMG and gaze shift responses, and the presence of neck EMG responses on trials without gaze shifts, implies that head premotor elements are not subjected to the same brain stem control mechanisms governing gaze shifts.

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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations64
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207