Abstract
We propose and examine a model for how perisaccadic visual receptive field dynamics, observed in a range of primate brain areas such as LIP, FEF, SC, V3, V3A, V2, and V1, may develop through a biologically plausible process of unsupervised visually guided learning. These dynamics are associated with remapping, which is the phenomenon where receptive fields anticipate the consequences of saccadic eye movements. We find that a neural network model using a local associative synaptic learning rule, when exposed to visual scenes in conjunction with saccades, can account for a range of associated phenomena. In particular, our model demonstrates predictive and pre-saccadic remapping, responsiveness shifts around the time of saccades, and remapping from multiple directions.
Highlights
A salient characteristic of visual perception in a natural environment is that, despite the high frequency of saccadic eye movements performed toward potentially interesting objects, our subjective visual experience is that of a continuous examination of a stationary environment
A stimulus was initially flashed in a particular pre-saccadic retinal location and a saccade was subsequently performed to a specific target location
MAIN FINDINGS This paper investigated the feasibility of the hypothesis, described in Section 2.1, that a biologically plausible process of visuallyguided learning could produce neurons with a range of experimentally observed perisaccadic receptive field properties
Summary
A salient characteristic of visual perception in a natural environment is that, despite the high frequency of saccadic eye movements performed toward potentially interesting objects, our subjective visual experience is that of a continuous examination of a stationary environment. The neurophysiological phenomena of predictive response and trace response truncation, found in primate areas such as LIP (Duhamel et al, 1992), SC (Walker et al, 1995), FEF (Umeno and Goldberg, 1997, 2001), and V3 (Nakamura and Colby, 2002), have later been suggested as the neural basis for this mechanism (Melcher and Colby, 2008). This is because they anticipate the visual consequences of impending eye movements at latencies much lower than in pure fixation tasks. While trace response truncation will do the same for a neuron which has its classical receptive field shifted away from the location of a salient stimulus
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call