MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prefrontal Cortex Deactivation in Macaques Alters Activity in the Superior Colliculus and Impairs Voluntary Control of Saccades

2011· article· en· W2092289085 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael J. Koval, Stephen G. Lomber, Stefan Everling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSuperior colliculusNeuroscienceDorsolateral prefrontal cortexSaccadePsychologyStimulus (psychology)Prefrontal cortexCognitionNeurophysiologyEye movementCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cognitive control of action requires both the suppression of automatic responses to sudden stimuli and the generation of behavior specified by abstract instructions. Though patient, functional imaging and neurophysiological studies have implicated the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) in these abilities, the mechanism by which the dlPFC exerts this control remains unknown. Here we examined the functional interaction of the dlPFC with the saccade circuitry by deactivating area 46 of the dlPFC and measuring its effects on the activity of single superior colliculus neurons in monkeys performing a cognitive saccade task. Deactivation of the dlPFC reduced preparatory activity and increased stimulus-related activity in these neurons. These changes in neural activity were accompanied by marked decreases in task performance as evidenced by longer reaction times and more task errors. The results suggest that the dlPFC participates in the cognitive control of gaze by suppressing stimulus-evoked automatic saccade programs.

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 score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations59
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207