MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310871180 · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01949

Role of Rostral Superior Colliculus in Gaze Stabilization during Visual Fixation

2022· article· en· W4310871180 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert A. Marino, Douglas P. Munoz, Ron Levy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSuperior colliculusPsychologyGazeFixation (population genetics)NeuroscienceSuperior ColliculiCommunicationCognitive psychologyVisual systemChemistryVisual cortex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual fixation (i.e., holding gaze on a specific visual object or location of interest) has been shown to be influenced by activity in the rostral pole of the intermediate layers of the superior colliculus (SCi)-a sensory-motor integration nucleus in the midbrain involved in visual fixation and saccadic eye movement generation. Neurons in the rostral SCi discharge tonically during visual fixation and pause during saccades to locations beyond their foveal visual-sensory or saccadic-motor response fields. Injection of muscimol to deactivate rostral SCi neurons also leads to an increase in fixation instability. However, the precise role of rostral SCi activity for controlling visual fixation has not been established and is actively debated. Here, we address whether this activity reflects signals related to task demands (i.e., maintaining visual fixation) or foveal visual stimulus properties. Two non-human primates performed an oculomotor task that required fixation of a central fixation point (FP) of varying luminance at the start of each trial. During this fixation period, we measured fixational saccades (≤ 2° of the FP, including microsaccades) and fixation-error saccades (> 2° from the FP) in combination with activity from the rostral SCi. Fixation of the lowest FP luminance increased the latency (onset time relative to initial FP foveation) for both fixational and fixation-error saccades. Fifty percent of the rostral SCi neurons exhibited activity that opposed the change in FP luminance and correlated with delayed fixational saccades and increased fixation-error saccades. Twenty-two percent of rostral SCi neurons exhibited activity that followed the change in FP luminance and correlated with earlier fixational saccades and decreased fixation-error saccades. This suggests the rostral SCi contains both sensory-driven and task-related motor signals related to foveal sensory stimuli and visual fixation. This evidence supports a role for the rostral SCi in gaze stabilization and can help inform artificial computational models of vision.

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)0.002
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cognitive NeuroscienceSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207