MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2215581998 · doi:10.1152/jn.2002.88.1.13

Vestibuloocular Reflex Dynamics During High-Frequency and High-Acceleration Rotations of the Head on Body in Rhesus Monkey

2002· article· en· W2215581998 on OpenAlexaff
Marko Huterer, Kathleen E. Cullen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVestibulo–ocular reflexReflexPhysicsHead (geology)Vestibular systemPhase lagEye movementDynamics (music)AccelerationCommunicationPsychologyNeuroscienceAcousticsMathematicsBiologyClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For frequencies >10 Hz, the vestibuloocular reflex (VOR) has been primarily investigated during passive rotations of the head on the body in humans. These prior studies suggest that eye movements lag head movements, as predicted by a 7-ms delay in the VOR reflex pathways. However, Minor and colleagues recently applied whole-body rotations of frequencies < or =15 Hz in monkeys and found that eye movements were nearly in phase with head motion across all frequencies. The goal of the present study was to determine whether VOR response dynamics actually differ significantly for whole-body versus head-on-body rotations. To address this question, we evaluated the gain and phase of the VOR induced by high-frequency oscillations of the head on the body in monkeys by directly measuring both head and eye movements using the magnetic search coil technique. A torque motor was used to rotate the heads of three Rhesus monkeys over the frequency range 5-25 Hz. Peak head velocity was held constant, first at +/-50 degrees /s and then +/-100 degrees /s. The VOR was found to be essentially compensatory across all frequencies; gains were near unity (1.1 at 5 Hz vs. 1.2 at 25 Hz), and phase lag increased only slightly with frequency (from 2 degrees at 5 Hz to 11 degrees at 25 Hz, a marked contrast to the 63 degrees lag at 25 Hz predicted by a 7-ms VOR latency). Furthermore, VOR response dynamics were comparable in darkness and when viewing a target and did not vary with peak velocity. Although monkeys offered less resistance to the initial cycles of applied head motion, the gain and phase of the VOR did not vary for early versus late cycles, suggesting that an efference copy of the motor command to the neck musculature did not alter VOR response dynamics. In addition, VOR dynamics were also probed by applying transient head perturbations with much greater accelerations (peak acceleration >15,000 degrees /s(2)) than have been previously employed. The VOR latency was between 5 and 6 ms, and mean gain was close to unity for two of the three animals tested. A simple linear model well described the VOR responses elicited by sinusoidal and transient head on body rotations. We conclude that the VOR is compensatory over a wide frequency range in monkeys and has similar response dynamics during passive rotation of the head on body as during passive rotation of the whole body in space.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations160
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207