MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965209089 · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2019.07.025

A differential role for the posterior cerebellum in the adaptive control of convergence eye movements

2019· article· en· W2965209089 on OpenAlexafffund
Ian M. Erkelens, William R. Bobier, Alicia C. Macmillan, Nicole L. Maione, Claudia Martin Calderon, Heidi Patterson, Benjamin Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain stimulation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Foundation for InnovationAmerican Academy of Optometry FoundationAmerican Association of Orthodontists Foundation
KeywordsCTBSEye movementSaccadic maskingTranscranial magnetic stimulationNeuroscienceNeurophysiologyMotor controlPsychologySmooth pursuitAdaptation (eye)Computer scienceStimulationPrimary motor cortex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The vergence oculomotor system possesses two robust adaptive mechanisms; a fast "dynamic" and a slow "tonic" system that are both vital for single, clear and comfortable binocular vision. The neural substrates underlying these vergence adaptive mechanisms in humans is unclear. METHODS: We investigated the role of the posterior cerebellum in convergence adaptation using inhibitory continuous theta-burst repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (cTBS) within a double-blind, sham controlled design while eye movements were recorded at 250hz via infrared oculography. RESULTS: In a preliminary experiment we validated our stimulation protocols by reproducing results from previous work on saccadic adaptation during the classic double-step adaptive shortening paradigm. Following this, across a series of three separate experiments we observed a clear dissociation in the effect of cTBS on convergence adaptation. Dynamic adaptation was substantially reduced while tonic adaptation was unaffected. Baseline dynamic fusional vergence response were also unaffected by stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate a differential role for the posterior cerebellum in the adaptive control of convergence eye movements and provide initial evidence that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is a viable tool to investigate the neurophysiology of vergence control. The results are discussed in the context of the current models of implicit motor adaptation of vergence and their application to clinical populations and technology design in virtual and augmented head mounted display architectures. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The cerebellum plays a critical role in the adaptive control of motor systems. Vergence eye movements shift our gaze in depth allowing us to see in 3D and exhibit two distinct adaptive mechanisms that are engaged under a range of conditions including reading, wearing head-mounted displays and using a new spectacle prescription. It is unclear what role the cerebellum plays in these adaptive mechanisms. To answer this, we temporarily disrupted the function of the posterior cerebellum using non-invasive brain stimulation and report impairment of only one adaptive mechanism, providing evidence for neural compartmentalization. The results have implications for vergence control models and applications to comfort and experience studies in head-mounted displays and the rehabilitation of clinical populations exhibiting vergence dysfunctions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBrain stimulationSame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207