Attenuation of visual reafferent signals in the parietal cortex during voluntary movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that the cortical processing of somatosensory and auditory signals is attenuated when they result from self-generated actions compared with external events. This phenomenon is thought to result from an efference copy of motor commands used to predict the sensory consequences of an action through a forward model. The present work examined whether attenuation also takes place for visual reafferent signals from the moving limb during voluntary reaching movements. To address this issue, EEG activity was recorded in a condition in which visual feedback of the hand was provided in real time and compared with a condition in which it was presented with a 150-ms delay, thus creating a mismatch between the predicted and actual visual consequences of the movement. Results revealed that the amplitude of the N1 component of the visual event-related potential evoked by hand visual feedback over the parietal cortex was significantly smaller when presented in real time compared with when it was delayed. These data suggest that the cortical processing of visual reafferent signals is attenuated when they are correctly predicted, likely as a result of a forward model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".