MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113494472 · doi:10.1152/jn.00166.2014

Dorsal premotor cortex: neural correlates of reach target decisions based on a color-location matching rule and conflicting sensory evidence

2015· article· en· W2113494472 on OpenAlexafffund
Émilie Coallier, Thomas Michelet, John Kalaska

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of Canada
KeywordsNeurosciencePsychologyPremotor cortexSensory systemDorsumTask (project management)Selection (genetic algorithm)CommunicationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We recorded single-neuron activity in dorsal premotor (PMd) and primary motor cortex (M1) of two monkeys in a reach-target selection task. The monkeys chose between two color-coded potential targets by determining which target's color matched the predominant color of a multicolored checkerboard-like Decision Cue (DC). Different DCs contained differing numbers of colored squares matching each target. The DCs provided evidence about the correct target ranging from unambiguous (one color only) to very ambiguous and conflicting (nearly equal number of squares of each color). Differences in choice behavior (reach response times and success rates as a function of DC ambiguity) of the monkeys suggested that each applied a different strategy for using the target-choice evidence in the DCs. Nevertheless, the appearance of the DCs evoked a transient coactivation of PMd neurons preferring both potential targets in both monkeys. Reach response time depended both on how long it took activity to increase in neurons that preferred the chosen target and on how long it took to suppress the activity of neurons that preferred the rejected target, in both correct-choice and error-choice trials. These results indicate that PMd neurons in this task are not activated exclusively by a signal proportional to the net color bias of the DCs. They are instead initially modulated by the conflicting evidence supporting both response choices; final target selection may result from a competition between representations of the alternative choices. The results also indicate a temporal overlap between action selection and action initiation processes in PMd and M1.

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)0.002
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 score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations102
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207