Neural signatures of associational cortex emerge in a goal-directed model of visual search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Animals actively engage with their environment to gather information, continuously shaping both their sensory input and behavior. Understanding this closed loop between perception and action remains a central challenge in neuroscience. A key example is active vision, where observers decide where to look next, selectively sampling from their visual space to guide ongoing perception and action. However, despite major advances in linking neural activity with behavior and computational modeling of vision under passive viewing conditions, the interactive aspects of natural vision remain underexplored. Visual search, the act of locating a target among distractors, exemplifies this dynamic sampling process and has long served as a core paradigm for studying visual attention. While its behavioral and neural signatures have been characterized in humans and non-human primates, a unifying model that links these neural phenomena to behavior during visual search has been lacking. Here, we present a biologically aligned neural network model trained to perform visual search directly from natural scenes by generating sequences of saccades to locate a target. The model generalizes to novel objects and scenes, produces human-like scanpaths, and recapitulates classic behavioral biases in human visual search. Strikingly, units in the model exhibit neural response properties characteristic of the fronto-parietal network, including a stable cue template in working memory, a retinocentric cue-similarity map, and prospective fixation signals. Beyond reproducing known behavioral and neural phenomena, the model reveals a representational geometry that supports cue-driven prioritization, spatial memory, and planning of future fixations. These results establish a computational framework for studying visual search as an emergent property of goal-directed perception, offering concrete predictions for neurophysiological and behavioral testing, and paving the way toward a unified account of active vision.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".