MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2753871800 · doi:10.1167/17.10.740

Superior colliculus coordinates pupillary and saccadic responses

2017· article· en· W2753871800 on OpenAlexaff
Chin‐An Wang, Douglas P. Munoz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSaccadic maskingMicrostimulationSuperior colliculusSaccadePupillometryPupilStimulus (psychology)NeuroscienceStimulationPupillary responsePsychologySaccadic suppression of image displacementEye movementAudiologyMedicineCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The appearance of a salient stimulus in the environment evokes a series of responses to orient the body for appropriate action. These responses include eye movements and pupil dilation that may be coordinated by the midbrain superior colliculus (SC). The role of the SC on saccade and pupil dilation has been separately established, but whether these responses are linked is still unknown. Here, we investigated the coordination between saccadic and pupillary responses through microstimulation of the SC with manipulating stimulation parameters and background luminance. Parameters of SC microstimulation are known to systematically modulate properties of evoked saccades. If the orienting responses are coordinated by the SC, the similar modulation should be observed in pupil size by varying stimulation train frequency and duration (frequency: 150-300 Hz; stimulation train duration: 25-100 ms). While requiring monkeys to maintain central fixation, we stimulated the intermediate SC layers. Varying train frequency and duration systematically modulated saccadic as well as pupillary responses. Importantly, the positive trial-by-trial correlation between two responses was observed within individual stimulation condition. Trials with larger saccadic responses had larger pupillary responses, and larger pupil responses were observed on trials with evoked saccades, compared to trials without evoked saccades. These results together suggest that the same output signals from the intermediate SC project to both pupil and saccade premotor circuits to initiate coordinated responses. Background luminance influenced pupillary but not saccadic responses, characterizing the pupil-specific modulation. Together, our results demonstrate coordinated orienting movements of saccade and pupil size through the SC, importantly extending an integrated role of the SC among various orienting movements. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2017

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanisms→French-language works237,207→