Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25642198›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2014

Binocular fusion and invariant category learning due to predictive remapping during scanning of a depthful scene with eye movements.

Stephen Grossberg, Karthik Srinivasan, Arash Yazdanbakhsh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen GrossbergCenter for Adaptive Systems, Graduate Program in Cognitive and Neural Systems, Center of Excellence for Learning in Education, Science and Technology, Center for Computational Neuroscience and Neural Technology, and Department of Mathematics Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Karthik SrinivasanCenter for Adaptive Systems, Graduate Program in Cognitive and Neural Systems, Center of Excellence for Learning in Education, Science and Technology, Center for Computational Neuroscience and Neural Technology, and Department of Mathematics Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Arash YazdanbakhshCenter for Adaptive Systems, Graduate Program in Cognitive and Neural Systems, Center of Excellence for Learning in Education, Science and Technology, Center for Computational Neuroscience and Neural Technology, and Department of Mathematics Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Boston University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How does the brain maintain stable fusion of 3D scenes when the eyes move? Every eye movement causes each retinal position to process a different set of scenic features, and thus the brain needs to binocularly fuse new combinations of features at each position after an eye movement. Despite these breaks in retinotopic fusion due to each movement, previously fused representations of a scene in depth often appear stable. The 3D ARTSCAN neural model proposes how the brain does this by unifying concepts about how multiple cortical areas in the What and Where cortical streams interact to coordinate processes of 3D boundary and surface perception, spatial attention, invariant object category learning, predictive remapping, eye movement control, and learned coordinate transformations. The model explains data from single neuron and psychophysical studies of covert visual attention shifts prior to eye movements. The model further clarifies how perceptual, attentional, and cognitive interactions among multiple brain regions (LGN, V1, V2, V3A, V4, MT, MST, PPC, LIP, ITp, ITa, SC) may accomplish predictive remapping as part of the process whereby view-invariant object categories are learned. These results build upon earlier neural models of 3D vision and figure-ground separation and the learning of invariant object categories as the eyes freely scan a scene. A key process concerns how an object's surface representation generates a form-fitting distribution of spatial attention, or attentional shroud, in parietal cortex that helps maintain the stability of multiple perceptual and cognitive processes. Predictive eye movement signals maintain the stability of the shroud, as well as of binocularly fused perceptual boundaries and surface representations.

Indexed as

category learningdepth perceptiongain fieldsobject recognitionperceptual stabilitypredictive remappingsaccadic eye movementsspatial attention

Identifiers

PMID25642198
PMCPMC4294135
OpenAlexW2026501617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.