fMRI Activation in the Human Frontal Eye Field Is Correlated With Saccadic Reaction Time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variation in response latency to identical sensory stimuli has been attributed to variation in neural activity mediating preparatory set. Here we report evidence for a relationship between saccadic reaction time (SRT) and set-related brain activity measured with event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. We measured hemodynamic activation time-courses during a preparatory "gap" period, during which no visual stimulus was present and no saccades were made. The subjects merely anticipated appearance of the target. Saccade direction and latency were recorded during scanning, and trials were sorted according to SRT. Both the frontal (FEF) and supplementary eye fields showed pre-target preparatory activity, but only in the FEF was this activity correlated with SRT. Activation in the intraparietal sulcus did not show any preparatory activity. These data provide evidence that the human FEF plays a central role in saccade initiation; pre-target activity in this region predicts both the type of eye movement (whether the subject will look toward or away from the target) and when a future saccade will occur.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".