Fast Smooth Pursuit Inhibition Reveals Mechanisms of Multisensory Integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans have the remarkable ability to react quickly to sudden changes in the visual environment, presumably via a fast, subcortical pathway. However, how these rapid orienting responses are affected by stimuli from mixed modalities, such as light and sound, is less well known. Here, we study the fast inhibition of smooth pursuit eye movements, occurring reflexively in response to the sudden onset of auditory, visual, or audiovisual distractors. Unlike saccades, smooth pursuit provides a continuous and graded measure of sensorimotor control, allowing us to reveal mechanisms of multisensory integration for fast sensorimotor control. Observers (n=16) tracked a horizontally moving disc while eye movements were recorded. After a random delay (0.5-1s) an auditory, visual, or audiovisual distractor was presented for 50 ms in 60% of trials; no distractor was presented in the remaining 40% of trials (control trials). Distractor presentation elicited a transient inhibition in smooth pursuit velocity ~100 ms after distractor onset, followed by an increase in pursuit velocity above baseline (rebound). Pursuit inhibition revealed graded velocity changes to the auditory (-2.7%), visual (-5.5%), and audiovisual distractors (-9.1 %; all p<.01 compared to control trials). Similarly, the increase in pursuit velocity during the rebound period scaled with distractor type (auditory: +3.7%, visual: +6.2%, and audiovisual: +9.6%; all p<.01). The audiovisual responses were significantly stronger than the visual-only (p=.004) or auditory-only conditions (p<.001). Strikingly, the linear sum of the unisensory conditions predicted the outcome of the multisensory condition, indicating an additive effect of multisensory stimulation on oculomotor inhibition. Our findings demonstrate strong effects of multisensory stimulation on fast sensorimotor control (smooth pursuit inhibition). The short latency of these responses suggests the involvement of a fast sensorimotor system, presumably mediated via the superior colliculus—a midbrain structure involved in both oculomotor orienting and multisensory integration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".