MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045023428 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-68589-9

Atypical visual processing in a mouse model of autism

2020· article· en· W3045023428 on OpenAlexafffund
Ning Cheng, Eden B. Pagtalunan, Abdulrahman Abushaibah, Jessica Naidu, William K. Stell, Jong M. Rho, Yves Sauvé

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Children's Hospital Research InstituteAlberta Children's Hospital FoundationCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleChildren's Hospital FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFoundation Fighting Blindness
KeywordsPhotopic visionScotopic visionVisual processingOptokinetic reflexNeuroscienceAutismPsychologyStimulus (psychology)Visual perceptionAutism spectrum disorderRetinaSpatial frequencyVisual fieldPerceptionEye movementCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human social cognition relies heavily on the processing of various visual cues, such as eye contact and facial expressions. Atypical visual perception and integration have been recognized as key phenotypes in individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and may potentially contribute to impediments in normal social development, a hallmark of ASD. Meanwhile, increasing studies on visual function in ASD have pointed to detail-oriented perception, which has been hypothesized to result from heightened response to information of high spatial frequency. However, mixed results of human studies have led to much debate, and investigations using animal models have been limited. Here, using BTBR mice as a model of idiopathic ASD, we assessed retinal stimulus processing by full-field electroretinogram and found impaired photoreceptor function and retina-based alterations mostly in the cone pathway. Using the optokinetic reflex to evaluate visual function, we observed robustly enhanced visual response to finer spatial details and more subtle contrasts at only higher spatial frequencies in the BTBR mice, under both photopic and scotopic conditions. These behavioral results, which are similar to findings in a subset of ASD patients, indicate a bias toward processing information of high spatial frequencies. Together, these findings also suggest that, while enhancement of visual behaviors under both photopic and scotopic conditions might be due to alterations in visual processing common to both rod and cone pathways, these mechanisms are probably downstream of photoreceptor function.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207