Flexible Reference Frames for Grasp Planning in Human Parietofrontal Cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reaching to a location in space is supported by a cortical network that operates in a variety of reference frames. Computational models and recent fMRI evidence suggest that this diversity originates from neuronal populations dynamically shifting between reference frames as a function of task demands and sensory modality. In this human fMRI study, we extend this framework to nonmanipulative grasping movements, an action that depends on multiple properties of a target, not only its spatial location. By presenting targets visually or somaesthetically, and by manipulating gaze direction, we investigate how information about a target is encoded in gaze- and body-centered reference frames in dorsomedial and dorsolateral grasping-related circuits. Data were analyzed using a novel multivariate approach that combines classification and cross-classification measures to explicitly aggregate evidence in favor of and against the presence of gaze- and body-centered reference frames. We used this approach to determine whether reference frames are differentially recruited depending on the availability of sensory information, and where in the cortical networks there is common coding across modalities. Only in the left anterior intraparietal sulcus (aIPS) was coding of the grasping target modality dependent: predominantly gaze-centered for visual targets and body-centered for somaesthetic targets. Left superior parieto-occipital cortex consistently coded targets for grasping in a gaze-centered reference frame. Left anterior precuneus and premotor areas operated in a modality-independent, body-centered frame. These findings reveal how dorsolateral grasping area aIPS could play a role in the transition between modality-independent gaze-centered spatial maps and body-centered motor areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".