Frames of Reference for Gaze Saccades Evoked During Stimulation of Lateral Intraparietal Cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies suggest that stimulation of lateral intraparietal cortex (LIP) evokes saccadic eye movements toward eye- or head-fixed goals, whereas most single-unit studies suggest that LIP uses an eye-fixed frame with eye-position modulations. The goal of our study was to determine the reference frame for gaze shifts evoked during LIP stimulation in head-unrestrained monkeys. Two macaques (M1 and M2) were implanted with recording chambers over the right intraparietal sulcus and with search coils for recording three-dimensional eye and head movements. The LIP region was microstimulated using pulse trains of 300 Hz, 100-150 microA, and 200 ms. Eighty-five putative LIP sites in M1 and 194 putative sites in M2 were used in our quantitative analysis throughout this study. Average amplitude of the stimulation-evoked gaze shifts was 8.67 degrees for M1 and 7.97 degrees for M2 with very small head movements. When these gaze-shift trajectories were rotated into three coordinate frames (eye, head, and body), gaze endpoint distribution for all sites was most convergent to a common point when plotted in eye coordinates. Across all sites, the eye-centered model provided a significantly better fit compared with the head, body, or fixed-vector models (where the latter model signifies no modulation of the gaze trajectory as a function of initial gaze position). Moreover, the probability of evoking a gaze shift from any one particular position was modulated by the current gaze direction (independent of saccade direction). These results provide causal evidence that the motor commands from LIP encode gaze command in eye-fixed coordinates but are also subtly modulated by initial gaze position.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".