Back

Timing and Amplitude of Catch-up Saccades to Accelerating Targets

Dore, S.; Coutinho, J. D.; Brooks, E.; Khan, A. Z.; Lefevre, P.; Blohm, G.

2024-01-12 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.01.11.575233 bioRxiv
Show abstract

To track moving targets, humans move their eyes using both saccades and smooth pursuit. If pursuit eye movements fail to accurately track the moving target, catch-up saccades are initiated to rectify the tracking error. It is well known that retinal position and velocity errors determine saccade timing and amplitude, but the extent to which retinal acceleration error influences these aspects is not well quantified. To test this, 13 adult human participants performed an experiment where they pursued accelerating / decelerating targets. During ongoing pursuit, we introduced a randomly sized target step to evoke a catch-up saccade and analyzed its timing and amplitude. We observed that retinal acceleration error was a statistically significant predictor of saccade amplitude and timing. A multiple linear regression supported our hypothesis that retinal acceleration errors influence saccade amplitude in addition to the influence of retinal position and velocity errors. We also found that saccade latencies were shorter when retinal acceleration error increased the tracking error and vice versa. In summary, our findings support a model in which retinal acceleration error is used to compute a predicted position error [~]100ms into the future to trigger saccades and determine saccade amplitude. Significance statementWhen visually tracking object motion, humans combine smooth pursuit and saccadic eye movements to maintain the target image on the fovea. Retinal position and velocity errors are known to determine catch-up saccade amplitude and timing, however it is unknown if retinal acceleration error is also used to predict future target position. This study provides evidence of a small but statistically significant contribution of retinal acceleration error in determining saccade amplitude and timing.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.