MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084213577 · doi:10.1167/14.10.983

fMRI adaptation of color and achromatic contrast in the human LGN and visual cortex: evidence for color and luminance selectivity

2014· article· en· W2084213577 on OpenAlexaff
Dorita H. F. Chang, Robert F. Hess, Benjamin Thompson, Kathy T. Mullen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAchromatic lensAdaptation (eye)Chromatic scaleContrast (vision)LuminanceVisual cortexChromatic adaptationPsychologyOpticsNeurosciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Color sensitive neurons in the primate visual system are thought to fall into two distinct types: a minority that are color selective with little response to achromatic contrast, and a majority that respond well to both color and achromatic contrast. The functional roles of these two populations are unknown. Here we use an fMRI adaptation paradigm to investigate the selectivity of the human LGN, V1 and extrastriate cortical areas to color and achromatic contrast. Methods: The effect of adaptation was measured in a block design comparing adaptation and no-adaptation conditions. Adapting stimuli were high contrast isoluminant RG or achromatic sinewave counter-phasing rings (0.5cpd, 2Hz, 12 sec duration) and test stimuli were lower contrast RG or achromatic rings presented for 18 sec. We assume that cross adaptation of responses to chromatic and achromatic stimuli indicates a common neural substrate for both, whereas a lack of cross adaptation indicates selective neural regions. Regions of interest (ROIs; LGN, V1, V2, V3, VP, V3A, V4, hMT+) were independently localized using standard procedures. Functional data were analyzed using percent signal change and fixed effects GLM analyses contrasting responses following adaptation versus no adaptation. Results: We observed the greatest adaptation effect when the adaptor and test stimuli were similar: after chromatic adaptation BOLD responses were lower for chromatic than achromatic stimuli, but after achromatic adaptation responses were lower for achromatic than chromatic stimuli. This effect was found in all ROIs and provides evidence for selective adaptation. Notably, we also found ROI-dependent variation in sensitivity to adaptation. In particular, hMT+ was most affected by adaptation to achromatic contrast for all test stimuli and exhibited the least selectivity. Conclusion: The results support the functional presence of color selective neurons in the human visual system that can adapt independently to color contrast, with the likely exception of hMT+. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2014

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 score0.004

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207