Dissociation between the impact of evidence on eye movement target choice and confidence judgements

It has been suggested that the evidence used to support a decision to move our eyes and the confidence we have in that decision are derived from a common source. Alternatively, confidence may be based on further post-decisional processes. In three experiments we examined this. In Experiment 1, participants chose between two targets on the basis of varying levels of evidence (i.e., the direction of motion coherence in a Random-Dot-Kinematogram). They indicated this choice by making a saccade to one of two targets and then indicated their confidence. Saccade trajectory deviation was taken as a measure of the inhibition of the non-selected target. We found that as evidence increased so did confidence and deviations of saccade trajectory away from the non-selected target. However, a correlational analysis suggested they were not related. In Experiment 2 an option to opt-out of the choice was offered on some trials if choice proved too difficult. In this way we isolated trials on which confidence in target selection was high (i.e., when the option to opt-out was available but not taken). Again saccade trajectory deviations were found not to differ in relation to confidence. In Experiment 3 we directly manipulated confidence, such that participants had high or low task confidence. They showed no differences in saccade trajectory deviations. These results support post-decisional accounts of confidence: evidence supporting the decision to move the eyes is reflected in saccade control, but the confidence that we have in that choice is subject to further post-decisional processes

Application of Consensus Scoring and Principal Component Analysis for Virtual Screening against β-Secretase (BACE-1)

BACKGROUND: In order to identify novel chemical classes of β-secretase (BACE-1) inhibitors, an alternative scoring protocol, Principal Component Analysis (PCA), was proposed to summarize most of the information from the original scoring functions and re-rank the results from the virtual screening against BACE-1. METHOD: Given a training set (50 BACE-1 inhibitors and 9950 inactive diverse compounds), three rank-based virtual screening methods, individual scoring, conventional consensus scoring and PCA, were judged by the hit number in the top 1% of the ranked list. The docking poses were generated by Surflex, five scoring functions (Surflex_Score, D_Score, G_Score, ChemScore, and PMF_Score) were used for pose extraction. For each pose group, twelve scoring functions (Surflex_Score, D_Score, G_Score, ChemScore, PMF_Score, LigScore1, LigScore2, PLP1, PLP2, jain, Ludi_1, and Ludi_2) were used for the pose rank. For a test set, 113,228 chemical compounds (Sigma-Aldrich® corporate chemical directory) were docked by Surflex, then ranked by the same three ranking methods motioned above to select the potential active compounds for experimental test. RESULTS: For the training set, the PCA approach yielded consistently superior rankings compared to conventional consensus scoring and single scoring. For the test set, the top 20 compounds according to conventional consensus scoring were experimentally tested, no inhibitor was found. Then, we relied on PCA scoring protocol to test another different top 20 compounds and two low micromolar inhibitors (S450588 and 276065) were emerged through the BACE-1 fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) assay. CONCLUSION: The PCA method extends the conventional consensus scoring in a quantitative statistical manner and would appear to have considerable potential for chemical screening applications

The spatial impact of visual distractors on saccade latency

Remote transient changes in the environment, such as the onset of visual distractors, impact on the exe- cution of target directed saccadic eye movements. Studies that have examined the latency of the saccade response have shown conflicting results. When there was an element of target selection, saccade latency increased as the distance between distractor and target increased. In contrast, when target selection is minimized by restricting the target to appear on one axis position, latency has been found to be slowest when the distractor is shown at fixation and reduces as it moves away from this position, rather than from the target. Here we report four experiments examining saccade latency as target and distractor posi- tions are varied. We find support for both a dependence of saccade latency on distractor distance from target and from fixation: saccade latency was longer when distractor is shown close to fixation and even longer still when shown in an opposite location (180°) to the target. We suggest that this is due to inhib- itory interactions between the distractor, fixation and the target interfering with fixation disengagement and target selection

Virtual Seminar on the Bioapparatus

Includes a text based on transcripts of proceedings of a seminar on the "bioapparatus," conceived as the focus of issues concerning technology and the body. Statements by 20 artists and writers treat such topics as natural artifice, designing the social, virtual reality, art machines, and aural/visual space. Biographical notes on the participants