The role of temporal cortex in the control of attention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention is an indispensable component of active vision. Contrary to the widely accepted notion that temporal cortex processing primarily focusses on passive object recognition, a series of very recent studies emphasize the role of temporal cortex structures, specifically the superior temporal sulcus (STS) and inferotemporal (IT) cortex, in guiding attention and implementing cognitive programs relevant for behavioral tasks. The goal of this theoretical paper is to advance the hypothesis that the temporal cortex attention network (TAN) entails necessary components to actively participate in attentional control in a flexible task-dependent manner. First, we will briefly discuss the general architecture of the temporal cortex with a focus on the STS and IT cortex of monkeys and their modulation with attention. Then we will review evidence from behavioral and neurophysiological studies that support their guidance of attention in the presence of cognitive control signals. Next, we propose a mechanistic framework for executive control of attention in the temporal cortex. Finally, we summarize the role of temporal cortex in implementing cognitive programs and discuss how they contribute to the dynamic nature of visual attention to ensure flexible behavior.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".