Frequency-Dependent Attentional Modulation of Local Field Potential Signals in Macaque Area MT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual attention modulates neuronal responses in primate motion processing area MT. However, whether it modulates the strength local field potentials (LFP-power) within this area remains unexplored, as well as how this modulation relates to the one of the neurons' response. We investigated these issues by simultaneously recording LFPs and neuronal responses evoked by moving random dot patterns of varying direction and contrast in area MT of two male monkeys (Macaca mulatta) during different behavioral conditions. We found that: (1) LFP-power in the gamma (30-120 Hz), but not in the delta (2-4 Hz), (4-8 Hz), alpha (8-12 Hz), beta(1) (12-20 Hz), and beta(2) (20-30 Hz) frequency bands, was tuned for motion direction and contrast, similarly to the neurons' response, (2) shifting attention into a neuron's receptive field (RF) decreased LFP-power in the bands below 30 Hz (except the band), whereas shifting attention to a stimulus motion direction outside the RF had no effect in these bands, (3) LFP-power in the gamma band, however, exhibited both spatial- and motion direction-dependent attentional modulation (increase or decrease), which was highly correlated with the modulation of the neurons' response. These results demonstrate that in area MT, shifting attention into the RFs of neurons in the vicinity of the recording electrode, or to the direction of a moving stimulus located far away from these RFs, distinctively modulates LFP-power in the various frequency bands. They further suggest differences in the neural mechanisms underlying these types of attentional modulation of visual processing.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".