MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122124631 · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2005.848686

An internally switched model of ocular tracking with prediction

2005· article· en· W2122124631 on OpenAlexaff
Wonjae Lee, Henrietta L. Galiana

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmooth pursuitSaccadeSuperior colliculusComputer scienceController (irrigation)Optokinetic reflexControl theory (sociology)Synchronization (alternating current)NeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceEye movementControl (management)Psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ocular tracking of targets in biological systems involves switching between two strategies: slow pursuit and fast corrective saccades producing pursuit nystagmus. Here, a symmetric (bilateral) controller is used as a model for the oculomotor control system (OCS) to drive two cameras on a robotic head. It relies, as in biology, on internal switching in shared premotor circuits to alternate automatically between the two types of movements comprising nystagmus. The symmetric structural concept is gaining acceptance as evidence points to sharing of both fast phase and slow phase control in brainstem structures previously thought to be solely involved in one mode alone. This bilateral OCS model is a parsimonious design that is at once biomimetic and analytically simple. We extend prior results by incorporating more biological clues from floccular projections to establish rudimentary prediction mechanisms for both slow and fast phases; prediction is achieved by using retinal slip, which contains target velocity information. This provides a more accurate replication of the difference between fast phase and slow phase dynamics, and considers neural activity profiles in the superior colliculus to refine the controller performance. The resulting controller eliminates the need for saccades in steady state for low frequency inputs, and each saccade now has better accuracy, despite visual delays.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation EngineeringSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207