MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386293958 · doi:10.31219/osf.io/bkaep

How anticipatory remapping along the saccade direction predicts peri-saccadic biphasic mislocalization

2023· preprint· en· W4386293958 on OpenAlexafffund
Yohaï-Eliel Berreby, B. Suresh Krishna

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsSaccadeComputer scienceComputer visionEye movementArtificial intelligenceGazeSaccadic eye movementNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When we view the world, we move our gaze to bring light from different parts of the scene to the fovea. A given static stimulus in the visual scene therefore falls on different parts of the retina before and after a saccade. It has been shown that neurons in many visual and oculomotor “priority-map” brain areas respond to stimuli appearing before the saccade at the spatial location that their receptive field will occupy after the saccade, as if they are anticipating the consequences of the saccade. In a separate line of work, psychophysical studies have shown that stimuli flashed around the time of a saccade are systematically mislocalized in various characteristic patterns --- one of these is a biphasic pattern where flashes right before a saccade are mislocalized in the saccade direction and flashes right after a saccade are mislocalized opposite to the saccade direction. The anticipatory remapping along the saccade direction and the mislocalization along the saccade direction have been suspected to be linked, but there has been no explicit model of how they might be linked and some studies have called this connection into question. Here, we present a circuit model that shows how anticipatory remapping along the saccade direction predicts biphasic mislocalization of brief peri-saccadic flashes similar to that seen in empirical data. The mislocalization, rather than being an artifact of the remapping, is a result of incomplete remapping right before the saccade and residual remapping after the saccade. Smaller magnitudes of remapping before the saccade lead to larger forward mislocalization of pre-saccadic flashes, and smaller magnitudes of remapping after the saccade lead to smaller backward mislocalization of post-saccadic flashes. The model is consistent with the known physiology of RF remapping and trans-saccadic information transfer and makes clear predictions regarding the dynamics of RF remapping and trans-saccadic response updating for task-relevant stimuli that can be tested in future experiments. To the extent that RF remapping mechanisms along the saccade direction impact the same representations that may be used for the spatial localization of peri-saccadic flashes, they predict a biphasic mislocalization pattern for peri-saccadic flashes that is similar to what has been shown empirically.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanisms→French-language works237,207→