MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2732682743 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1701672114

Coherent alpha oscillations link current and future receptive fields during saccades

2017· article· en· W2732682743 on OpenAlexafffund
Sujaya Neupane, Daniel Guitton, Christopher C. Pack

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsReceptive fieldNeuroscienceStimulus (psychology)SaccadePerceptionEye movementSurround suppressionComputer sciencePsychologyVisual perceptionCommunicationPhysicsCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oscillations are ubiquitous in the brain, and they can powerfully influence neural coding. In particular, when oscillations at distinct sites are coherent, they provide a means of gating the flow of neural signals between different cortical regions. Coherent oscillations also occur within individual brain regions, although the purpose of this coherence is not well understood. Here, we report that within a single brain region, coherent alpha oscillations link stimulus representations as they change in space and time. Specifically, in primate cortical area V4, alpha coherence links sites that encode the retinal location of a visual stimulus before and after a saccade. These coherence changes exhibit properties similar to those of receptive field remapping, a phenomenon in which individual neurons change their receptive fields according to the metrics of each saccade. In particular, alpha coherence, like remapping, is highly dependent on the saccade vector and the spatial arrangement of current and future receptive fields. Moreover, although visual stimulation plays a modulatory role, it is neither necessary nor sufficient to elicit alpha coherence. Indeed, a similar pattern of coherence is observed even when saccades are made in darkness. Together, these results show that the pattern of alpha coherence across the retinotopic map in V4 matches many of the properties of receptive field remapping. Thus, oscillatory coherence might play a role in constructing the stable representation of visual space that is an essential aspect of conscious perception.

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)0.001
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 score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations28
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207