MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3158632667 · doi:10.1101/2021.05.06.442988

Unilateral Resection of Both Cortical Visual Pathways Alters Action but not Perception

2021· preprint· en· W3158632667 on OpenAlexafffund
Zoha Ahmad, Marlene Behrmann, Christina Patterson, Erez Freud

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsVisual systemNeuroscienceDorsumPerceptionPsychologyVision for perception and vision for actionVisual perceptionContrast (vision)AnatomyVisual cortexBiologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The human cortical visual system consists of two major pathways, a ventral pathway that subserves perception and a dorsal pathway that subserves visuomotor control. These pathways follow dissociable developmental trajectories, and, accordingly, might be differentially susceptible to neurodevelopmental disorders or injuries. Previous studies have found that children with cortical resections of the ventral visual pathway retain largely normal visuoperceptual abilities. Whether visually guided actions, supported by computations carried out by the dorsal pathway, follow a similar pattern remains unknown. To address this question, we examined visuoperceptual and visuomotor behaviors in a pediatric patient, TC, who underwent a cortical resection that included portions of the left ventral and dorsal pathways. We collected data when TC used her right and left hands to perceptually estimate the width blocks that varied in width and length, and, separately, to grasp the same blocks. TC’s perceptual estimation performance was comparable to that of controls, independent of the hand used. In contrast, relative to controls, she showed reduced visuomotor sensitivity to object shape and this was more evident when she grasped the objects with her contralesional right hand. These results provide evidence for a striking difference in the reorganization profiles of the two visual pathways. This difference supports the notion that the two pathways exhibit differential susceptibility to neurodevelopmental disorders.

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)0.001
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicMotor Control and Adaptation→French-language works237,207→