Occipital cortex is modulated by transsaccadic changes in spatial frequency: an fMRI study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous neuroimaging studies have shown that inferior parietal and ventral occipital cortex are involved in the transsaccadic processing of visual object orientation. Here, we investigated whether the same areas are also involved in transsaccadic processing of a different feature, namely, spatial frequency. We employed a functional magnetic resonance imaging paradigm where participants briefly viewed a grating stimulus with a specific spatial frequency that later reappeared with the same or different frequency, after a saccade or continuous fixation. First, using a whole-brain Saccade > Fixation contrast, we localized two frontal (left precentral sulcus and right medial superior frontal gyrus), four parietal (bilateral superior parietal lobule and precuneus), and four occipital (bilateral cuneus and lingual gyri) regions. Whereas the frontoparietal sites showed task specificity, the occipital sites were also modulated in a saccade control task. Only occipital cortex showed transsaccadic feature modulations, with significant repetition enhancement in right cuneus. These observations (parietal task specificity, occipital enhancement, right lateralization) are consistent with previous transsaccadic studies. However, the specific regions differed (ventrolateral for orientation, dorsomedial for spatial frequency). Overall, this study supports a general role for occipital and parietal cortex in transsaccadic vision, with a specific role for cuneus in spatial frequency processing.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".