MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2963776501 · doi:10.1101/710426

Laminar differences in responses to naturalistic texture in macaque V1 and V2

2019· preprint· en· W2963776501 on OpenAlexaff
Corey M. Ziemba, Richard K. Perez, Julia Pai, Luke E. Hallum, Christopher Shooner, Jenna G. Kelly, J. Anthony Movshon

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMacaqueContrast (vision)Texture (cosmology)Visual cortexNoise (video)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligencePsychologyNeuroscienceComputer scienceImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Most single units recorded from macaque V2 respond with higher firing rates to synthetic texture images containing “naturalistic” higher-order statistics than to spectrally matched “noise” images lacking these statistics. In contrast, few single units in V1 show this property. We explored how the strength and dynamics of response vary across the different layers of visual cortex by recording multiunit and gamma band activity evoked by brief presentations of naturalistic and noise images in V1 and V2 of anesthetized macaque monkeys. As previously reported, recordings in V2 showed consistently stronger responses to naturalistic texture than to spectrally matched noise. In contrast to single unit recordings, V1 multiunit activity showed some preference for images with naturalistic statistics, and in gamma band activity this preference was comparable across V1 and V2. Sensitivity to naturalistic image structure was strongest in the supragranular and infragranular layers of V1, but weak in granular layers, suggesting that it might reflect feedback from V2. Response timing was consistent with this idea. Visual responses appeared first in V1, followed by V2. Sensitivity to naturalistic texture emerged first in V2, followed by the supragranular and infragranular layers of V1, and finally in the granular layers of V1. Our results demonstrate laminar differences in the encoding of higher-order statistics of natural texture, and suggest that this sensitivity first arises in V2 and is fed back to modulate activity in V1. Significance Statement The circuit mechanisms responsible for visual representations of intermediate complexity are largely unknown. We used a well-validated set of synthetic texture stimuli to probe the temporal and laminar profile of sensitivity to the higher-order statistical structure of natural images. We found that this sensitivity emerges first and most strongly in V2 but soon after in V1. However, sensitivity in V1 is higher in the laminae (extragranular) and recording modalities (local field potential) most likely affected by V2 connections, suggesting a feedback origin. Our results show how sensitivity to naturalistic image structure emerges across time and circuitry in the early visual cortex.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→