Parallel Channels for Motion Feature Extraction in the Pretectum and Tectum of Larval Zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-cortical visual areas in vertebrate brains extract relevant stimulus features, such as motion, object size, and location, to support diverse behavioral tasks. The optic tectum and pretectum, two primary visual areas in zebrafish, are involved in motion processing, and yet their differential neural representation of behaviorally relevant visual features is unclear. Here, we characterize receptive fields (RFs) of motion-sensitive neurons in the diencephalon and midbrain. We show that RFs of many pretectal neurons are large and sample the lower visual field, whereas RFs of tectal neurons are mostly small-size selective and sample the upper nasal visual field more densely. Furthermore, optomotor swimming can reliably be evoked by presenting forward motion in the lower temporal visual field alone, matching the lower visual field bias of the pretectum. Thus, tectum and pretectum extract different visual features from distinct regions of visual space, which is likely a result of their adaptations to hunting and optomotor behavior, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".