MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Attentional Modulation of Motion Integration of Individual Neurons in the Middle Temporal Visual Area

2004· article· en· W2151327310 on OpenAlexaff
Erik P. Cook, John H. R. Maunsell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Eye InstituteHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsVisual cortexMotion (physics)NeuroscienceMotion perceptionModulation (music)Computer sciencePhysicsBiological systemArtificial intelligencePsychologyBiologyAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined how spatially directed attention affected the integration of motion in neurons of the middle temporal (MT) area of visual cortex. We recorded from single MT neurons while monkeys performed a motion detection task under two attentional states. Using 0% coherent random dot motion, we estimated the optimal linear transfer function (or kernel) between the global motion and the neuronal response. This linear kernel filtered the random dot motion across direction, speed, and time. Slightly less than one-half of the neurons produced reasonably well defined kernels that also tended to account for both the directional selectivity and responses to coherent motion of different strengths. This subpopulation of cells had faster, more transient, and more robust responses to visual stimuli than neurons with kernels that did not contain well defined regions of integration. For those neurons that had large attentional modulation and produced well defined kernels, we found attention scaled the temporal profile of the transfer function with no appreciable shift in time or change in shape. Thus, for MT neurons described by a linear transfer function, attention produced a multiplicative scaling of the temporal integration window.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 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

Citations86
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207