Hand Modulation of Visual, Preparatory, and Saccadic Activity in the Monkey Frontal Eye Field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavioral studies have shown that hand position influences saccade characteristics. This study examined the neuronal changes that could underlie this behavioral observation. Single neurons were recorded in the frontal eye field (FEF) of 2 monkeys as they executed a visually guided saccade task, while holding their hand at given locations on a touch screen. The task was performed with the hand either visible or invisible, in order to assess the relative contribution of visual and proprioceptive information on hand position. Among the 224 neurons tested, the visual, saccadic and/or preparatory activity of more than half of them was modulated by hand position, whether the hand was visible or invisible. Comparison of lower (hand's workspace) and upper (out of reach) visual targets showed that hand modulation was predominant in the hand's workspace. Finally, some cells preferred congruency of hand and target in space, others preferred incongruency. Interestingly, hand modulation of saccadic activity correlated with hand position effects on saccade reaction times. We conclude that visual and proprioceptive signals derived from the hand are integrated by FEF neurons. These signals can modulate target selection through attention and allow the oculomotor system to use hand-related somatosensory signals for the initiation of visually guided saccades.
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".