MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153379147 · doi:10.1186/1471-2202-15-s1-p184

Theoretical understanding of three-dimensional, head-free gaze-shift

2014· article· en· W2153379147 on OpenAlexaff
Mehdi Daemi, Douglas Crawford

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neuroscience · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGazeHead (geology)Cognitive sciencePsychologyNeuroscienceCognitive psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shifting the line of sight is naturally accomplished by the movements of both eye and head. We are studying the oclumotor system responsible for planning such head-free gaze-shifts. This includes not only the study of the kinematic mechanisms for coordination of eye and head in three-dimensional space, but also an inquiry into the nature of the internal representations that underlie the observed behavior. The latter is believed to be based on neural representations of sensory signals, coding information is receptors’ frame of reference, being transformed into representations of motor commands, coding information in effectors’ reference frame. At the behavioral level, we propose a kinematic model which gets retinal error and initial eye and head orientations as input and describes an experimentally-inspired sequence of rotations including saccadic eye movement, head movement and vestibule-ocular reflex (VOR). Experimentally observed constraints, Listings’ law for eye and Fick strategy for head [1], have been applied. Independent parameters have been defined to control the amount of the head rotation and its contribution to gaze. Figure ​Figure11 shows the flow of information in the model in which input and output signals are shown in red and blue boxes respectively and each signal is computed specifically based on the signals from which it receives input. Figure 1 Flow of information in the static kinematic model. Red rectangles show model inputs. Blue rectangles show model outputs. Black ovals are the model parameters. At the representation level, we have used the neural engineering framework (NEF) [2] to implement a neurophysiologically realistic model of the system. Signals in the kinematic model, shown in figure ​figure1,1, were considered multidimensional vectors represented by a combination of nonlinear encoding and weighted linear decoding. Computation of each variable from other signals was implemented by transformation of the representations: nonlinear functions of multiple variables characterized as a biased linear decoding of some higher-dimensional representation in a population. We have considered the neurophysiological evidence on the brain areas encoding different signals (e.g. representation of target relative to eye in SC or representation of eye movement relative to head in PPRF and riMLF) as constraints on their representations in our model. The success of our theoretical study will be evaluated by its success in simulating the known behavior and replicating internal neural signals resembling those recorded by neurophysiologists. The kinematic model has been evaluated based on successfully simulating the known behavior: the accuracy of the gaze shifts and obeying the kinematic constraints for eye and head. The neural network model will be evaluated based on its success in replicating the internal neural signals resembling those recorded by neurophysiologists: the frames of reference and position dependencies of the artificial units.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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