MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perceptual-Cognitive Integration for Goal-Directed Action in Naturalistic Environments

2023· review· en· W4388486788 on OpenAlexaff
Jolande Fooken, Bianca R. Baltaretu, Deborah A. Barany, Gabriel J. Diaz, Jennifer A. Semrau, Tarkeshwar Singh, J. Douglas Crawford

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityQueen's University
FundersUniversity of South CarolinaPennsylvania State UniversityNational Eye InstituteUniversity of PennsylvaniaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftResearch to Prevent BlindnessNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCognitionPerceptionPsychologyCognitive neuroscienceAction (physics)Cognitive psychologyCognitive scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-world actions require one to simultaneously perceive, think, and act on the surrounding world, requiring the integration of (bottom-up) sensory information and (top-down) cognitive and motor signals. Studying these processes involves the intellectual challenge of cutting across traditional neuroscience silos, and the technical challenge of recording data in uncontrolled natural environments. However, recent advances in techniques, such as neuroimaging, virtual reality, and motion tracking, allow one to address these issues in naturalistic environments for both healthy participants and clinical populations. In this review, we survey six topics in which naturalistic approaches have advanced both our fundamental understanding of brain function and how neurologic deficits influence goal-directed, coordinated action in naturalistic environments. The first part conveys fundamental neuroscience mechanisms related to visuospatial coding for action, adaptive eye-hand coordination, and visuomotor integration for manual interception. The second part discusses applications of such knowledge to neurologic deficits, specifically, steering in the presence of cortical blindness, impact of stroke on visual-proprioceptive integration, and impact of visual search and working memory deficits. This translational approach-extending knowledge from lab to rehab-provides new insights into the complex interplay between perceptual, motor, and cognitive control in naturalistic tasks that are relevant for both basic and clinical research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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