MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127758216 · doi:10.1101/2021.01.29.428908

Trial-by-trial modulation of express visuomotor responses induced by symbolic or barely detectable cues

2021· preprint· en· W3127758216 on OpenAlexaff
Samuele Contemori, Gerald E. Loeb, Brian D. Corneil, Guy Wallis, Timothy J. Carroll

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsSuperior colliculusPsychologyStimulus (psychology)NeuroscienceSuperior ColliculiCognitionContrast (vision)Visual cortexCommunicationCognitive psychologyComputer scienceVisual systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Human cerebral cortex can produce visuomotor responses that are modulated by contextual and task-specific constraints. However, the distributed cortical network for visuomotor transformations limits the minimal response time of that pathway. Notably, humans can generate express visuomotor responses that are inflexibly tuned to the target location and occur 80-120ms from stimulus presentation (stimulus-locked responses, SLRs). This suggests a subcortical pathway for visuomotor transformations involving the superior colliculus and its downstream reticulo-spinal projections. Here we investigated whether cognitive expectations can modulate the SLR. In one experiment, we recorded surface EMG from shoulder muscles as participants reached toward a visual target whose location was unpredictable in control conditions, and partially predictable in cue conditions by extrapolating a symbolic cue (75% validity). Valid symbolic cues led to faster and larger SLRs than control conditions; invalid symbolic cues produced slower and smaller SLRs than control conditions. This is consistent with a cortical top-down modulation of the putative subcortical SLR-network. In a second experiment, we presented high-contrast targets in isolation (control) or ~24ms after low-contrast stimuli, which could appear at the same (valid cue) or opposite (invalid cue) location as the target, and with equal probability (50% cue validity). We observed faster SLRs than control with the valid low-contrast cues, whereas the invalid cues led to the opposite results. These findings may reflect exogenous priming mechanisms of the SLR network, potentially evolving subcortically via the superior colliculus. Overall, our results support both top-down and bottom-up modulations of the putative subcortical SLR network in humans. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Express visuomotor responses in humans appear to reflect subcortical sensorimotor transformation of visual inputs, potentially conveyed via the tecto-reticulo-spinal pathway. Here we show that the express responses are influenced both by symbolic and barely detectable spatial cues about stimulus location. The symbolic cue-induced effects suggest cortical top-down modulation of the putative subcortical visuomotor network. The effects of barely detectable cues may reflect exogenous priming mechanisms of the tecto-reticulo-spinal pathway.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207