MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410817159 · doi:10.1162/jocn.a.56

Temporal Evolution of Color Representations Measured with Magnetoencephalography Reveals a “Coarse to Fine” Dynamic

2025· article· en· W4410817159 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin Goddard, Kathy T. Mullen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAustralian Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHueMagnetoencephalographyPsychologyCategorizationStimulus (psychology)Color visionPerceptionCategorical variableChromatic scalePattern recognition (psychology)Cognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceCommunicationNeuroscienceMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Color perception is based on the differential spectral responses of the L-, M-, and S-cones and subsequent subcortical and cortical computations and may include the influence of higher-order factors such as language. Although the early subcortical stages of color vision are well characterized, the organization of cortical representations of color remain elusive, despite numerous models based on discrimination thresholds, appearance, and categorization. An underexplored aspect of cortical color representations is how they unfold over time. Here, we compare the dynamic reorganization of three different color representations over time using magnetoencephalography. We measured neural responses to 14 hues at each of three achromatic luminances (increment, isoluminant, and decrement) while participants attended either to the exact color of the stimulus or its color category. We used a series of classification analyses, combined with multidimensional scaling and representational similarity analysis, to ask how cortical representations of color unfold over time from stimulus onset. We compared the performance of "higher order" models based on hue and color category with a model based simply on stimulus cone contrast and found that all models had significant correlations with the data. However, the unique variance accounted for by each model revealed a dynamic change in hue responses over time, which was consistent with a "coarse to fine" transition from a broad clustering into categorical groups to a finer within-category representation. Notably, these dynamics were replicated across data sets from both tasks, suggesting they reflect a robust reorganization of cortical hue responses over time.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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