MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204514069 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhab358

Symmetry Processing in the Macaque Visual Cortex

2021· article· en· W3204514069 on OpenAlexafffund
Pauline Audurier, Yseult Héjja‐Brichard, Vanessa De Castro, Peter J. Kohler, Anthony M. Norcia, Jean‐Baptiste Durand, Benoit R. Cottereau

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Eye InstituteCanada First Research Excellence FundAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsMacaqueSymmetry (geometry)NeuroimagingReflection symmetryNeurosciencePsychologyPhysicsCognitive psychologyMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symmetry is a highly salient feature of the natural world that is perceived by many species. In humans, the cerebral areas processing symmetry are now well identified from neuroimaging measurements. Macaque could constitute a good animal model to explore the underlying neural mechanisms, but a previous comparative study concluded that functional magnetic resonance imaging responses to mirror symmetry in this species were weaker than those observed in humans. Here, we re-examined symmetry processing in macaques from a broader perspective, using both rotation and reflection symmetry embedded in regular textures. Highly consistent responses to symmetry were found in a large network of areas (notably in areas V3 and V4), in line with what was reported in humans under identical experimental conditions. Our results suggest that the cortical networks that process symmetry in humans and macaques are potentially more similar than previously reported and point toward macaque as a relevant model for understanding symmetry 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 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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