Neural Correlates of Speed-Tuned Motion Perception in Healthy Adults
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 it