MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128632566 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp314

"What" and "Where" in the Intraparietal Sulcus: An fMRI Study of Object Identity and Location in Visual Short-Term Memory

2010· article· en· W2128632566 on OpenAlexafffund
Anthony M. Harrison, René Marois

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIntraparietal sulcusFunctional magnetic resonance imagingPsychologyVisual short-term memoryObject (grammar)NeuroscienceWorking memoryCognitive psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intraparietal sulcus (IPS) has been closely linked to limitations of visual short-term memory capacity (VSTM; Todd and Marois 2004; Xu and Chun 2006). It is not clearly known, however, to what extent IPS activation reflects VSTM for object identity (What) versus spatial location (Where) information. The present study was designed to manipulate selectively the amount of What and Where information retained in VSTM in order to determine, using functional magnetic resonance imaging, the effect of VSTM for each of these 2 dimensions on IPS activation. The results showed an increase in IPS activation only in response to increasing Where memory load, with no effect of What load suggesting that capacity-related activation in the IPS primarily reflects the amount of spatial information retained in VSTM.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations67
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207