Threshold mechanism for saccade initiation in frontal eye field and superior colliculus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an influential model of frontal eye field (FEF) and superior colliculus (SC) activity, saccade initiation occurs when the discharge rate of either single neurons or a population of neurons encoding a saccade motor plan reaches a threshold level of activity. Conflicting evidence exists for whether this threshold is fixed or can change under different conditions. We tested the fixed-threshold hypothesis at the single-neuron and population levels to help resolve the inconsistency between previous studies. Two rhesus monkeys performed a randomly interleaved pro- and antisaccade task in which they had to look either toward (pro) or 180° away (anti) from a peripheral visual stimulus. We isolated visuomotor (VM) and motor (M) neurons in the FEF and SC and tested three specific predictions of a fixed-threshold hypothesis. We found little support for fixed thresholds. First, correlations were never totally absent between presaccadic discharge rate and saccadic reaction time when examining a larger (plausible) temporal period. Second, presaccadic discharge rates varied markedly between saccade tasks. Third, visual responses exceeded presaccadic motor discharges for FEF and SC VM neurons. We calculated that only a remarkably strong bias for M neurons in downstream projections could render the fixed-threshold hypothesis plausible at the population level. Also, comparisons of gap vs. overlap conditions indicate that increased inhibitory tone may be associated with stability of thresholds. We propose that fixed thresholds are the exception rather than the rule in FEF and SC, and that stabilization of an otherwise variable threshold depends on task-related, inhibitory modulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".