MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201506564 · doi:10.1093/texcom/tgab054

Impaired Spatial Inhibition Processes for Interhemispheric Anti-saccades following Dorsal Posterior Parietal Lesions

2021· article· en· W3201506564 on OpenAlexafffund
Julie Ouerfelli‐Ethier, Roméo Salemme, Romain Fournet, Christian Urquizar, Laure Pisella, Aarlenne Z. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex Communications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsSaccadePosterior parietal cortexNeurosciencePsychologyDorsumEye movementParietal lobeInhibitory postsynaptic potentialVisual cortexMedicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anti-saccades are eye movements that require inhibition to stop the automatic saccade to the visual target and to perform instead a saccade in the opposite direction. The inhibitory processes underlying anti-saccades have been primarily associated with frontal cortex areas for their role in executive control. Impaired performance in anti-saccades has also been associated with the parietal cortex, but its role in inhibitory processes remains unclear. Here, we tested the assumption that the dorsal parietal cortex contributes to spatial inhibition processes of contralateral visual target. We measured anti-saccade performance in 2 unilateral optic ataxia patients and 15 age-matched controls. Participants performed 90 degree (across and within visual fields) and 180 degree inversion anti-saccades, as well as pro-saccades. The main result was that our patients took longer to inhibit visually guided saccades when the visual target was presented in the ataxic hemifield and the task required a saccade across hemifields. This was observed through anti-saccades latencies and error rates. These deficits show the crucial role of the dorsal posterior parietal cortex in spatial inhibition of contralateral visual target representations to plan an accurate anti-saccade toward the ipsilesional side.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral Cortex CommunicationsSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207