MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neuronal Correlates for Preparatory Set Associated with Pro-Saccades and Anti-Saccades in the Primate Frontal Eye Field

2000· article· en· W2104663113 on OpenAlexafffund
Stefan Everling, Douglas P. Munoz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSaccadeSaccadic maskingSuperior colliculusNeuroscienceStimulus (psychology)Antisaccade taskPsychologyFrontal eye fieldsEye movementAntidromicPrimatePremovement neuronal activitySupplementary eye fieldSaccadic eye movementElectrophysiologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diversity in behavioral responses to sensory stimuli has been attributed to variations in preparatory set. Variability in oculomotor responses toward identical visual stimuli has been well documented, but the neuronal processes underlying this variability are poorly understood. Here, we report evidence for set-related activity for saccadic eye movements in single neurons in the frontal eye field (FEF) in monkeys trained on a task in which they either had to look toward a visual stimulus (pro-saccade) or away from the stimulus (anti-saccade) depending on a previous instruction. A portion of FEF neurons were identified as neurons projecting directly to the superior colliculus (SC) with antidromic activation techniques. Saccade-related neurons in the FEF had lower prestimulus and stimulus-related activity on anti-saccade trials compared with pro-saccade trials. The level of prestimulus activity correlated with saccadic reaction times, express saccade occurrence, and errors in the anti-saccade task. In addition, saccade-related activity in the FEF was higher for pro-saccades than for anti-saccades. These results demonstrate that the direct descending pathway from the FEF to the SC carries preparatory set-related activity for pro-saccades and anti-saccades. The results also provide insights into the neuronal basis of variations in saccadic reaction times and in the control of the prepotent response to glance to a flashed stimulus.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations568
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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