MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801590105 · doi:10.1177/0301006618771463

Neural Correlates of Speed-Tuned Motion Perception in Healthy Adults

2018· article· en· W2801590105 on OpenAlexafffund
Kimberly Meier, Marita Partanen, Deborah Giaschi

Bibliographic record

VenuePerception · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFunctional magnetic resonance imagingIntraparietal sulcusMotion (physics)Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Motion perceptionNeurosciencePsychologyPerceptionPhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been suggested that slow and medium-to-fast speeds of motion may be processed by at least partially separate mechanisms. The purpose of this study was to establish the cortical areas activated during motion-defined form and global motion tasks as a function of speed, using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Participants performed discrimination tasks with random dot stimuli at high coherence, at coherence near their own thresholds, and for random motion. Stimuli were moving at 0.1 or 5 deg/s. In the motion-defined form task, lateral occipital complex, V5/MT+ and intraparietal sulcus showed greater activation by high or near-threshold coherence than by random motion stimuli; V5/MT+ and intraparietal sulcus demonstrated greater activation for 5 than 0.1 deg/s dot motion. In the global motion task, only high coherence stimuli elicited significant activation over random motion; this activation was primarily in nonclassical motion areas. V5/MT+ was active for all motion conditions and showed similar activation for coherent and random motion. No regions demonstrated speed-tuning effects for global motion. These results suggest that similar cortical systems are activated by slow- and medium-speed stimuli during these tasks in healthy adults.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207