MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282802549 · doi:10.1152/jn.00631.2015

Tactile orientation perception: an ideal observer analysis of human psychophysical performance in relation to macaque area 3b receptive fields

2015· article· en· W2282802549 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan M. Peters, Phillip Staibano, Daniel Goldreich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMacaqueReceptive fieldPerceptionStimulus (psychology)PsychologyPsychophysicsOrientation (vector space)Observer (physics)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)NeuroscienceCommunicationComputer scienceComputer visionPhysicsMathematicsCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to resolve the orientation of edges is crucial to daily tactile and sensorimotor function, yet the means by which edge perception occurs is not well understood. Primate cortical area 3b neurons have diverse receptive field (RF) spatial structures that may participate in edge orientation perception. We evaluated five candidate RF models for macaque area 3b neurons, previously recorded while an oriented bar contacted the monkey's fingertip. We used a Bayesian classifier to assign each neuron a best-fit RF structure. We generated predictions for human performance by implementing an ideal observer that optimally decoded stimulus-evoked spike counts in the model neurons. The ideal observer predicted a saturating reduction in bar orientation discrimination threshold with increasing bar length. We tested 24 humans on an automated, precision-controlled bar orientation discrimination task and observed performance consistent with that predicted. We next queried the ideal observer to discover the RF structure and number of cortical neurons that best matched each participant's performance. Human perception was matched with a median of 24 model neurons firing throughout a 1-s period. The 10 lowest-performing participants were fit with RFs lacking inhibitory sidebands, whereas 12 of the 14 higher-performing participants were fit with RFs containing inhibitory sidebands. Participants whose discrimination improved as bar length increased to 10 mm were fit with longer RFs; those who performed well on the 2-mm bar, with narrower RFs. These results suggest plausible RF features and computational strategies underlying tactile spatial perception and may have implications for perceptual learning.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207