MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Disentangling Representations of Object and Grasp Properties in the Human Brain

2016· article· en· W2479114389 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGRASPObject (grammar)Contrast (vision)Property (philosophy)Premotor cortexArtificial intelligenceRepresentation (politics)PsychologyCommunicationComputer visionSomatosensory systemComputer sciencePosterior parietal cortexNeuroscienceVisual cortexFunctional magnetic resonance imagingHand strengthPrimary motor cortexSimilarity (geometry)Motor cortexDorsumBiologyAnatomyGrip strengthImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: The properties of objects, such as shape, influence the way we grasp them. To quantify the role of different brain regions during grasping, it is necessary to disentangle the processing of visual dimensions related to object properties from the motor aspects related to the specific hand configuration. We orthogonally varied object properties (shape, size, and elongation) and task (passive viewing, precision grip with two or five digits, or coarse grip with five digits) and used representational similarity analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data to infer the representation of object properties and hand configuration in the human brain. We found that object elongation is the most strongly represented object feature during grasping and is coded preferentially in the primary visual cortex as well as the anterior and posterior superior-parieto-occipital cortex. By contrast, primary somatosensory, motor, and ventral premotor cortices coded preferentially the number of digits while ventral-stream and dorsal-stream regions coded a mix of visual and motor dimensions. The representation of object features varied with task modality, as object elongation was less relevant during passive viewing than grasping. To summarize, this study shows that elongation is a particularly relevant property of the object to grasp, which along with the number of digits used, is represented within both ventral-stream and parietal regions, suggesting that communication between the two streams about these specific visual and motor dimensions might be relevant to the execution of efficient grasping actions. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: To grasp something, the visual properties of an object guide preshaping of the hand into the appropriate configuration. Different grips can be used, and different objects require different hand configurations. However, in natural actions, grip and object type are often confounded, and the few experiments that have attempted to separate them have produced conflicting results. As such, it is unclear how visual and motor properties are represented across brain regions during grasping. Here we orthogonally manipulated object properties and grip, and revealed the visual dimension (object elongation) and the motor dimension (number of digits) that are more strongly coded in ventral and dorsal streams. These results suggest that both streams play a role in the visuomotor coding essential for grasping.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.232 · 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