MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280756123 · doi:10.1068/p5251b

The Effect of Central and Peripheral Field Stimulation on the Rise Time and Gain of Human Optokinetic Nystagmus

2005· article· en· W2280756123 on OpenAlexaff
Richard V. Abadi, Ian P. Howard, Masao Ohmi

Bibliographic record

VenuePerception · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsOptokinetic reflexStimulus (psychology)PeripheralNystagmusVisual fieldStimulationPhysicsAudiologyOpticsEye movementPsychologyNeuroscienceMedicineCognitive psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We wished to examine the spatial (gain) and temporal (rise time) properties of human optokinetic nystagmus (OKN) as a function of stimulus velocity and field location. Stimuli were either M-scaled random dots or vertical stripes that moved at velocities between 20-80 deg s(-1). Three field conditions were examined: full field; a 20 deg central field; and a 12.5 deg central-field mask. OKN gain was found to be significantly affected by stimulus velocity and stimulus location, with the higher stimulus velocities and the 12.5 deg central-field mask giving lower gains. Steady-state gains for all three field conditions were not found to be affected by prior adaptation to stationary or moving stimuli. The 63% rise time was found to be significantly affected by the stimulus velocity, whereas this was not the case for the 90% rise time. Neither rise time was found to be significantly affected by the field location. These results indicate that, although the effectiveness (gain) of peripheral retina is lower than that of the central retina during optokinetic stimulation, the peripheral retina has access to common mechanisms responsible for the fast component of OKN.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations17
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207