MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106333495 · doi:10.1162/0898929054985455

Rule-dependent Activity for Prosaccades and Antisaccades in the Primate Prefrontal Cortex

2005· article· en· W2106333495 on OpenAlexafffund
Stefan Everling, Joseph F. X. DeSouza

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
KeywordsAntisaccade taskPsychologyStimulus (psychology)Prefrontal cortexSaccadeNeurosciencePrimateCognitive psychologyEye movementFixation (population genetics)CognitionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Everyday life typically requires behavior that involves far more than simple stimulus-response associations. Environmental cues are often ambiguous and require different actions depending on the situation. The prefrontal cortex (PFC) is thought to be crucial for this flexible control of behavior. An important task that probes this ability is the antisaccade task in which subjects have to suppress a glance towards a suddenly presented peripheral stimulus and instead look away from the stimulus to its mirror location. Here we recorded the activity of PFC neurons in monkeys trained to alternate between blocks of prosaccade and antisaccade trials with no external instruction cues. We found that the activity of many neurons was different between the two tasks during the fixation period before the peripheral stimulus was presented. These differences were already present on the first correct trials after a task switch. The activity of these neurons also discriminated between correct responses and errors. We hypothesize that the PFC provides bias signals to saccade-related areas that are necessary to preset the oculomotor system for different tasks.

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)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations109
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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