MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2310456331 · doi:10.1152/jn.00636.2001

A Cortical Network Sensitive to Stimulus Salience in a Neutral Behavioral Context Across Multiple Sensory Modalities

2002· article· en· W2310456331 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Downar, Adrian P. Crawley, David J. Mikulis, Karen D. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNeuroscienceNoveltyStimulus (psychology)Functional magnetic resonance imagingSalience (neuroscience)Sensory systemStimulus modalityInferior frontal gyrusAnterior cingulate cortexCognitive psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stimulus salience depends both on behavioral context and on other factors such as novelty and frequency of occurrence. The temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) responds preferentially to behaviorally relevant stimuli and is thought to play a general role in detecting salient stimuli. If so, it should respond preferentially to novel or infrequent events, even in a neutral behavioral context. To test this hypothesis, we used event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to identify brain regions sensitive to the novelty of visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli during passive observation. Cortical regions with a greater response to novel than familiar stimuli across all modalities were identified at two sites in the TPJ region: the supramarginal gyrus (SMG) and superior temporal gyrus. The right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), right anterior insula, left anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), and left inferior temporal gyrus also showed sensitivity to novelty. The novelty-sensitive TPJ activation in SMG overlaps a region previously identified as sensitive behavioral context. This region may play a general role in identifying salient stimuli, whether the salience is due to the current behavioral context or not. The IFG activation overlaps regions previously identified as responsive to nonnovel sensory events regardless of behavioral context. The IFG may therefore play a general role in stimulus evaluation rather than a specific role in identifying novel stimuli. The ACC activation lies in a region active during complex response-selection tasks, suggesting a general role in detecting and/or planning responses to salient events. A frontal-parietal-cingulate network may serve to identify and evaluate salient sensory stimuli in general.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations551
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207