Color responses and their adaptation in human superior colliculus and lateral geniculate nucleus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use an fMRI adaptation paradigm to explore the selectivity of human responses in the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) and superior colliculus (SC) to red-green color and achromatic contrast. We measured responses to red-green (RG) and achromatic (ACH) high contrast sinewave counter-phasing rings with and without adaptation, within a block design. The signal for the RG test stimulus was reduced following both RG and ACH adaptation, whereas the signal for the ACH test was unaffected by either adaptor. These results provide compelling evidence that the human LGN and SC have significant capacity for color adaptation. Since in the LGN red-green responses are mediated by P cells, these findings are in contrast to earlier neurophysiological data from non-human primates that have shown weak or no contrast adaptation in the P pathway. Cross-adaptation of the red-green color response by achromatic contrast suggests unselective response adaptation and points to a dual role for P cells in responding to both color and achromatic contrast. We further show that subcortical adaptation is not restricted to the geniculostriate system, but is also present in the superior colliculus (SC), an oculomotor region that until recently, has been thought to be color-blind. Our data show that the human SC not only responds to red-green color contrast, but like the LGN, shows reliable but unselective adaptation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".