Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 280

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Computation of Inertial Motion: Neural Strategies to Resolve Ambiguous Otolith Information

Open access
Angelaki, Dora E., McHenry, M. Quinn, Dickman, J. David, Newlands, Shawn D., Hess, Bernhard J. M.·1999·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

According to Einstein’s equivalence principle, inertial accelerations during translational motion are physically indistinguishable from gravitational accelerations experienced during tilting movements. Nevertheless, despite ambiguous sensory representation of motion in primary otolith afferents, primate oculomotor responses are appropriately compensatory for the correct translational component of the head movement. The neural computational strategies used by the brain to discriminate the two and to reliably detect translational motion were investigated in the primate vestibulo-ocular system. The experimental protocols consisted of either lateral translations, roll tilts, or combined translation–tilt paradigms. Results using both steady-state sinusoidal and transient motion profiles in darkness or near target viewing demonstrated that semicircular canal signals are necessary sensory cues for the discrimination between different sources of linear acceleration. When the semicircular canals were inactivated, horizontal eye movements (appropriate for translational motion) could no longer be correlated with head translation. Instead, translational eye movements totally reflected the erroneous primary otolith afferent signals and were correlated with the resultant acceleration, regardless of whether it resulted from translation or tilt. Therefore, at least for frequencies in which the vestibulo-ocular reflex is important for gaze stabilization (>0.1 Hz), the oculomotor system discriminates between head translation and tilt primarily by sensory integration mechanisms rather than frequency segregation of otolith afferent information. Nonlinear neural computational schemes are proposed in which not only linear acceleration information from the otolith receptors but also angular velocity signals from the semicircular canals are simultaneously used by the brain to correctly estimate the source of linear acceleration and to elicit appropriate oculomotor responses.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.19-01-00316.1999

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 280

Metadata

Authors
Angelaki, D. E., McHenry, M. Q., Dickman, J. D., Newlands, S. D., & Hess, B. J. M.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1999-01-01
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
316-327
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2119655994
Cited by
280
References
1
FWCI
6.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Computation of Inertial Motion: Neural Strategies to Resolve Ambiguous Otolith Information. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.19-01-00316.1999
The paper
Angelaki, D. E., McHenry, M. Q., Dickman, J. D., Newlands, S. D., & Hess, B. J. M. (1999). Computation of Inertial Motion: Neural Strategies to Resolve Ambiguous Otolith Information. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.19-01-00316.1999

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.