12. The Role of the Human Prefrontal Cortex in the Response Suppression of Eye Movements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased activity in a population of prefrontal cortex neurons has been shown, in previous studies, to precede correct anti‐saccades in primates. In addition, the time courses of two competing processes in these neurons, task selection (which prepares for an eye movement) and saccade suppression (which prepares for the suppression of an eye movement), intersect at a specific time after the presentation of a coloured instruction cue. The purpose of this study is to use eye tracking behaviour to investigate this intersection point and its role in response suppression in regard to the generation of anti‐saccades in humans. Subjects were instructed before a stimulus appears, using a colour cue, to either look towards the stimulus (pro‐saccade) or away from the stimulus (anti‐saccade). Instruction period times varied from 100ms to 1400ms, in 50ms steps. Based on previous primate electrophysiological data, the ratio of direction errors (pro‐saccades on anti‐saccade trials) to correct anti‐saccades was expected to increase around 400ms to 500ms, when the processes of task selection and saccade suppression diverge. A slight ratio increase was found and full results are forthcoming.
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) | 0.002 | 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".