MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Control of Spatial and Feature-Based Attention in Frontoparietal Cortex

2010· article· en· W2083960328 on OpenAlexaff
Adam S. Greenberg, Michael Esterman, D G Wilson, John T. Serences, Steven Yantis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPosterior parietal cortexNeuroscienceCortex (anatomy)PsychologySuperior parietal lobuleInferior parietal lobulePrefrontal cortexWorking memoryParietal lobeAttentional controlFeature (linguistics)Functional specializationUnivariateTemporal cortexCognitionMultivariate statisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual attention selects task-relevant information from scenes to help achieve behavioral goals. Attention can be deployed within multiple domains to select specific spatial locations, features, or objects. Recent evidence has shown that voluntary shifts of attention in multiple domains are consistently associated with transient increases in cortical activity in medial superior parietal lobule, suggesting that this may be the source of a domain-independent control signal that initiates the reconfiguration of attention. To investigate this hypothesis, we used fMRI to measure changes in cortical activation while human subjects shifted attention between spatial locations or between colors at a location. Univariate multiple regression analysis revealed a common, domain-independent transient signal [in posterior parietal cortex (PPC) and prefrontal cortex] time-locked to shifts of attention in both domains. However, multivariate pattern classification conducted on the cortical surface revealed that the spatiotemporal pattern of activity within PPC differed reliably for spatial and feature-based attention shifts. These results suggest that the posterior parietal cortex is a common hub for the control of attention shifts but contains subpopulations of neurons with domain-specific tuning for cognitive control.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations189
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207