Impaired perception of isoluminant contrast modulation stimuli: Evidence for a magnocellular pathway mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Contrast modulation (CM) stimuli have been previously used to reveal nonlinear contributions of Y-like retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) such as parasol cells to cortical responses and perception. To test whether CMs are selectively processed within the magnocellular pathway, we assessed envelope motion discrimination and detection for achromatic (yellow-black) and chromatic (red-green) CMs in the presence of luminance masking noise to disrupt luminance-based mechanisms of motion processing. Compared to achromatic CMs, perception of chromatic CMs was more sensitive to luminance masking noise, suggesting that CM envelope motion perception relied predominantly on luminance signals. Specifically, envelope motion discrimination performance was better maintained for achromatic CMs than chromatic CMs, even at high masking noise levels. Notably, luminance masking noise greatly impaired envelope direction discrimination for chromatic CMs but had minimal impact on their detection, suggesting that chromatic aberrations may enhance envelope motion perception for chromatic CMs by introducing luminance signals. These findings collectively emphasize that CM stimuli selectively activate Y-like/parasol RGCs of the retino-geniculate magnocellular pathway, underscoring their potential to specifically target this pathway. This might have clinical advantages for early diagnosis in disorders such as glaucoma or dyslexia, where magnocellular pathway dysfunction is predominant.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".