MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404211217 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-78304-7

A deep learning model of dorsal and ventral visual streams for DVSD

2024· article· en· W4404211217 on OpenAlexaff
Masoumeh Zareh, Elaheh Toulabinejad, Mohammad Hossein Manshaei, Sayed Jalal Zahabi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDorsumSTREAMSComputer scienceDeep learningArtificial intelligenceNeuroscienceAnatomyBiologyComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) methods attempt to simulate the behavior and the neural activity of the brain. In particular, Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) offer state-of-the-art models of the ventral visual stream. Furthermore, no proposed model estimates the distance between objects as a function of the dorsal stream. In this paper, we present a quantitatively accurate model for the visual system. Specifically, we propose a VeDo-Net model that comprises both ventral and dorsal branches. As in the ventral visual stream, our model recognizes objects. The model also locates and estimates the distance between objects as a spatial relationship task performed by the dorsal stream. One application of the proposed model is in the simulation of visual impairments. In this study, however, we show how the proposed model can simulate the occurrence of dorsal stream impairments such as Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and cerebral visual impairment (CVI). In the end, we explore the impacts of learning on the recovery of the synaptic disruptions of the dorsal visual stream. Results indicated a direct relationship between the positive and negative changes in the weights of the dorsal stream's last layers and the output of the dorsal stream under an allocentric situation. Our results also demonstrate that visual-spatial perception impairments in ASD may be caused by a disturbance in the last layers of the dorsal stream.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207