MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137645264 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0508972103

Perceptual moments of conscious visual experience inferred from oscillatory brain activity

2006· article· en· W2137645264 on OpenAlexaff
Marie L. Smith, Frédéric Gosselin, Philippe G. Schyns

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionStimulus (psychology)ConsciousnessPsychologyCognitive psychologyElectroencephalographyVisual perceptionAudiologyNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transient periods of synchronized oscillating neuronal discharges in the brain have been proposed to support the discrete perceptual moments underlying conscious visual experience. However, the information content of these perceptual moments remains a critical challenge to the understanding of consciousness. We uncovered this information content in four observers who consciously perceived each interpretation of the ambiguous Dali painting Slave Market with the Disappearing Bust of Voltaire. For each individual observer, we isolated the stimulus spatial frequency (SF) features underlying their overt judgments of the input as "the nuns" and "Voltaire". Every 2 ms between stimulus onset and overt response, we derived the sensitivity of the observer's oscillatory brain activity (in the theta, alpha, and beta bandwidths) to these SF features. Then, in each bandwidth, we estimated the moments (between stimulus onset and perceptual judgment) when perception-specific SF features were maximally integrated, corresponding to perceptual moments. We show that the centroparietal beta oscillations support perceptual moments underlying the conscious perception of the nuns, whereas theta oscillations support the perception of Voltaire. For both perceptions, we reveal the specific information content of these perceptual moments.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations73
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207