Functional localization of visual motion area FST in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fundus of the superior temporal sulcus (FST) in macaque monkeys is implicated in the processing of complex motion signals, yet a human homolog remains elusive. To better understand the neural mechanisms underlying the analysis of complex motion signals in humans, it is crucial to understand if and where a region homologous to FST exists. Here, we considered potential localizers and evaluated their effectiveness in delineating putative FST (pFST) from two nearby motion-sensitive areas, hMT and MST, in humans. Nine participants underwent fMRI scanning sessions with 2D and 3D motion localizers, as well as population receptive field (pRF) mapping. We observed consistent anterior and inferior activation relative to hMT and MST in response to stimuli that contained coherent 3D, but not 2D, motion. Motion opponency and myelination measures further validated the functional and structural distinction between pFST and hMT/MST. At the same time, standard pRF mapping techniques that reveal the visual field organization of hMT/MST proved suboptimal for delineating pFST. Our findings provide confirmatory evidence for the existence of a functional homolog of macaque area FST in humans, offer a robust framework for localizing pFST, and underscore the area's distinct role in visual motion processing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".