MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vestibular Information Is Required for Dead Reckoning in the Rat

2002· article· en· W2167938504 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas G. Wallace, Dustin J. Hines, Sergio M. Pellis, Ian Q. Whishaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVestibular systemDead reckoningSensory cueProprioceptionSensory systemHeading (navigation)CommunicationMovement (music)Computer visionComputer scienceGeographyArtificial intelligencePsychologyNeuroscienceGlobal Positioning SystemGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dead reckoning is an on-line form of spatial navigation used by an animal to identify its present location and return directly to a starting location, even after circuitous outward trips. At present, it is not known which of several self-movement cues (efferent copy from movement commands, proprioceptive information, sensory flow, or vestibular information) are used to compute homeward trajectories. To determine whether vestibular information is important for dead reckoning, the impact of chemical labyrinthectomy was evaluated in a test that demanded on-line computation of a homeward trajectory. Rats were habituated to leave a refuge that was visible from all locations on a circular table to forage for large food pellets, which they carried back to the refuge to eat. Two different probe trials were given: (1) the rats foraged from the same spatial location from a hidden refuge in the light and so were able to use visual cues to navigate; (2) the same procedure took place in the dark, constraining the animals to dead reckon. Although control rats carried food directly and rapidly back to the refuge on both probes, the rats with vestibular lesions were able to do so on the hidden refuge but not on the dark probe. The scores of vestibular reflex tests predicted the dead reckoning deficit. The vestibular animals were also impaired in learning a new piloting task. This is the first unambiguous demonstration that vestibular information is used in dead reckoning and also contributes to piloting.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations181
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207