ライフサイエンスコーパス: opponent

1 solely consummatory aggression (biting of an opponent).

2 s of unpleasantly hot (spicy) sauce to their opponent.

3 , and the beliefs of each player about their opponent.

4 er's Dilemma game is played against the same opponent.

5 t' is the best response to any action by the opponent.

6 fighting ability but not the ability of its opponent.

7 history, as well as by the strategies of its opponent.

8 e and interactively competes against a human opponent.

9 le aggression at a later time and with a new opponent.

10 h player is the best given the action of its opponent.

11 not the best action given the action of the opponent.

12 layer is the best rule given the rule of its opponent.

13 lows weak networks to overcome the strongest opponent.

14 tort an unfair share of the payoffs from the opponent.

15 s of the previous interactions with the same opponent.

16 e predictable exploitation by their computer opponent.

17 thms based on the inferred strategies of the opponent.

18 e agents' beliefs about the actions of their opponents.

19 second fights against familiar or unfamiliar opponents.

20 i can respond to changes that occur in their opponents.

21 KOs to differentially attack male and female opponents.

22 rative genotypes elicited most aggression in opponents.

23 ptive differentiation in the face of diverse opponents.

24 depending on the level of familiarity of the opponents.

25 ve game against two independent computerized opponents.

26 up could produce significant advantages over opponents.

27 strategically use the option to anger their opponents.

28 targets on a large touchscreen before their opponents.

29 ng to predict the next-period behavior of an opponent, a rational player must take an action this per

30 favouring the physical punishment of unfair opponents, a finding that echoes recent evidence for alt

31 ese effects are achieved by different, often opponent, adaptive mechanisms in males and females, with

32 Playing a computerized opponent adopting a mixed-strategy equilibrium, particip

33 y were re-paired with familiar or unfamiliar opponents after 30 min of separation.

34 wise games in a Swiss tournament which pairs opponents against those which have performed equally wel

35 First, the receptive fields were Double-Opponent, an organization of spatial and chromatic oppon

36 atial selectivity, into chromatically single-opponent and double-opponent groups.

37 tide keyed to a particular move by the human opponent and indicates a move by fluorescence signaling

38 Double-opponent and non-opponent cells' orientation selectiviti

39 increase the perception of similarity among opponents and (ii) efficient lowering of the similarity

40 Males fought either a real opponent, and a winner and a loser were identified, or t

41 responds to fast flicker, is spectrally non-opponent, and supports normal motion perception.

42 This circuit generates both spatially opponent, "antiphase" inhibition ("push-pull"), and spat

43 Moreover, amifostine opponents argue that the evidence is insufficient to jus

44 t, the luminance channel has slow spectrally opponent as well as fast non-opponent inputs.

45 ed red-green (L-M) and blue-yellow (S-[L+M]) opponent axes.

46 e generated by stimuli that modulate the L-M opponent axis.

47 l prerequisites for the ability to integrate opponent beliefs into strategic choice, through system-l

48 tion of homeostatic energy utilization in an opponent, bivalent emotional control system.

49 we have characterized a population of color opponent (blue-ON) cells in recordings from the dorsal l

50 erous ZD strategies," that forgive defecting opponents but nonetheless dominate in evolving populatio

51 nly a player with a theory of mind about his opponent can do better, in which case Iterated Prisoner'

52 yer must take an action this period that the opponent can observe.

53 lear-cut because they can be associated with opponent categories (e.g., feminine male face).

54 eptive fields (0.5-0.7 degrees) than spatial-opponent cell centers (approximately 1 degree).

55 The M and S components of opponent cell receptive fields had approximately the sam

56 and konio-cellular LGN cells are of just two opponent-cell types, either differencing the L and M con

57 Many cone-opponent cells (48 of 83) were double-opponent, with cir

58 ition of S(o) input to that from the L and M opponent cells changes the chromatic appearance of all c

59 V1 double-opponent cells could be the neural basis of the influenc

60 In superior retina, the opponent cells had well-balanced M and S weights, while

61 outputs of S(o) cells with those of L and M opponent cells in the manner that we postulated earlier.

62 he combined activities of single- and double-opponent cells in V1 are needed for the full repertoire

63 Opponent cells injected with Lucifer yellow restricted t

64 ped the cone inputs (L, M, and S) to 83 cone-opponent cells representing the central visual field of

65 Single-opponent cells responded well to color but weakly to lum

66 We also found non-opponent cells that responded weakly or not at all to pu

67 Double-opponent cells were approximately equally orientation se

68 The remaining cone-opponent cells were either spatially opponent in only on

69 Most double-opponent cells were orientation selective to pure color

70 Double-opponent and non-opponent cells' orientation selectivities were not contr

71 Cone-opponent cells, constituting approximately 10% of V1 cel

72 ea pig, we identified small numbers of color-opponent cells.

73 discriminable throughout the brain after the opponent changed, compared with when the same opponent w

74 ile other, non-parvocellular, spectrally non-opponent channels are thought to play no part in colour

75 The hypothesis that the opponent circuitry emerges from selective connections be

76 ns both inhibitory and excitatory fragments (opponent coding) were present in the same image.

77 tage in the visual system at which spatially opponent color calculations are made.

78 two cardinal chromatic axes that define cone-opponent color space [L vs M or S vs (L + M)], providing

79 The pathway from opponent-color detectors in the retina to the motion ana

80 e luminance dimension and along the two cone-opponent colour directions.

81 reen opponent parvocellular neurons received opponent cone input (L+M- or M+L-) that overlapped in sp

82 signals (+fM and +fL), and slow, spectrally opponent cone input signals (+sL and -sM).

83 e luminance pathway has slow (s), spectrally opponent cone inputs in addition to the expected fast (f

84 ubjects' strategies were highly dependent on opponent context in this game, a fact that was reflected

85 and velocity signals can be accounted for by opponent contributions from the two sides of the cerebel

86 If the opponent cooperates, you get R if you cooperate and T if

87 If the opponent defects, you get S if you cooperate and P if yo

88 brain may mediate the balance between these opponent defensive behaviors.

89 n aftereffect, the illusion of motion in the opponent direction across the finger pad.

90 ve reaction time task in which the purported opponent displays either an angry or a neutral facial ex

91 but thereafter cooperate fully only if their opponent does the same.

92 o DGEs) strongly decreased aggressiveness in opponents (due to IGEs).

93 PFC neurons encoded chosen value, they used opponent encoding schemes such that averaging the neuron

94 ip between his or her payoff and that of the opponent even when restricting his or her actions to mer

95 earn to predict the future behavior of their opponents (even approximately) no matter what learning r

96 ioners succeeded against each of their human opponents, extortion resulted in lower payoffs than gene

97 he brain transcriptome were observed in real opponent fighters, with losers displaying both a higher

98 ock-paper-scissors game against a videotaped opponent, freely choosing their movement on each trial a

99 , retaliate more often, and regularly defeat opponents from the nonselected parent Canton-S strain.

100 The opponent functions of SOX10 to maintain neural lineage p

101 ne are speculated to subserve motivationally opponent functions, but this hypothesis has not been dir

102 the small bistratified, "blue-yellow" color-opponent ganglion cell receives parallel ON-depolarizing

103 n color discrimination and may contact color-opponent ganglion cells.

104 ted neurons that were strongly chromatically opponent generally lacked suppressive surrounds.

105 we report how the outputs of the L/M- and S-opponent geniculate cell types are combined in time at t

106 id (GABA) is co-released with its functional opponent, glutamate, from long-range basal ganglia input

107 nto chromatically single-opponent and double-opponent groups.

108 Surprisingly, despite the fact that the opponent has infinitely many donation levels from which

109 gorithm that fixes potential weaknesses that opponents have identified in the blueprint strategy.

110 ical and subcortical regions emerges from an opponent hemispheric pattern of activation and deactivat

111 Here, we investigated how opponent identity affects human reinforcement learning d

112 a V1 as orthogonal gratings are perceptually opponent in biasing hallucinations.

113 o unilaterally set the expected payoff of an opponent in iterated plays of the Prisoner's Dilemma irr

114 ng cone-opponent cells were either spatially opponent in only one cone system (20 of 83) or lacked sp

115 ultiple contextual frames, such as different opponents in a game, decision making and its neural corr

116 eyespots) inhibits aggressive response from opponents, in part because it forms more rapidly in domi

117 Strong opponent inhibition enables recognition of stimulus orie

118 Hebbian development yields opponent inhibition: inhibition evoked by stimuli antico

119 haracterized as chromatic, and the fast, non-opponent inputs (+fM and +fL) as achromatic, both contri

120 Some neurons receive opponent inputs from L and M cones, whereas others recei

121 , the luminance channel has slow, spectrally opponent inputs in addition to the expected non-opponent

122 t latency responses are mostly evoked by L/M-opponent inputs whereas longer latency responses are evo

123 slow spectrally opponent as well as fast non-opponent inputs.

124 ts in addition to the expected fast (f), non-opponent inputs.

125 ger latency responses are evoked mostly by S-opponent inputs.

126 s center-surround receptive fields and color-opponent interactions.

127 When plants recognize potential opponents, invading pathogens, wound signals, or abiotic

128 Perception of hue is opponent, involving the antagonistic comparison of signa

129 Post-conflict affiliation between opponents is further proposed to facilitate future coope

130 tential, RHP) and compares it to that of its opponent, is least understood.

131 f an animal does not know the ability of its opponent, knowing its own ability results in a lower lev

132 N/yellow-OFF receptive field are larger than opponent L/M-cone contributions via outer diffuse bipola

133 ons via outer diffuse bipolar cells and that opponent L/M-cone signals are conveyed mainly by inner S

134 When the opponent looked angry, BLA-orbitofrontal coupling was re

135 Although these slow, spectrally opponent luminance inputs (+sM and -sL) would usually be

136 g stimuli, since stimuli equated for the non-opponent luminance mechanism (+fM and +fL) may still gen

137 arvocellular pathway and to be encoded in an opponent manner, while other, non-parvocellular, spectra

138 ination may be subserved by a spectrally non-opponent mechanism, which does not have the characterist

139 that visual motion perception is mediated by opponent mechanisms that correspond to mutually suppress

140 he probability of a Hawk-Hawk fight when two opponents meet.

141 and somatosensory cortices of monkeys is the opponent model of rate coding by two distinct population

142 These findings indicate an apparently 'opponent' modulation of premature responses by NE and DA

143 normalizing a weighted population vector of opponent motion responses; normalization comes from neur

144 tion response was decoded by (1) creating an opponent motion signal for each neuron by treating its p

145 anisms (MST-MT feedback and disinhibition of opponent motion signals in MT) to explain existing data,

146 nd (2) computing the vector average of these opponent motion signals.

147 on that implements a vector average based on opponent motion.

148 ere exposed to a group-housed, nonaggressive opponent (NAO) for 5 min in a neutral cage arena.

149 involving a series of interactions in which opponents negotiate the final outcome.

150 negative coupling indicating competitive or opponent network dynamics.

151 irect or transsynaptic activating effects on opponent neuronal activity within this highly interconne

152 esent time-varying signals through these two opponent neuronal populations.

153 t pertains to light spectra, and that double-opponent neurons in early-level vision evolve to serve t

154 utputs of different cone types by spectrally opponent neurons in the retina and upstream in the later

155 cuits can combine signals from bidirectional opponent neurons to construct sensitive and robust neura

156 hes are thought to contain unoriented, color-opponent neurons.

157 R1-R6, qualifying them to function as color-opponent neurons.

158 ficacy study, and Jens Overgaard, a vehement opponent of amifostine therapy, provide thought-provokin

159 ta-catenin interaction partner and signaling opponent of other PKC isoforms in podocytes.

160 e versa, viz. that each is a self-interested opponent of the other and will reliably analyze games by

161 iovascular screening program, proponents and opponents of ECG screening have been busily debating.

162 Opponents of outpatient commitment argue that its coerci

163 Opponents of the decision prefer cotesting, as this appr

164 We find that, contrary to concerns voiced by opponents of the law, AB60 has had no discernible short-

165 Opponents of this interpretation point out that non-cann

166 ctions, an individual's ability to combat an opponent often improves with experience--for example, by

167 Opponents, on the other hand, are embedded in a looser f

168 onent inputs in addition to the expected non-opponent ones.

169 f fight outcome rather than just on self- or opponent-only assessment of fighting ability.

170 ndent of pheromonal input, gonadal hormones, opponents, or social context.

171 Red-green opponent parvocellular neurons received opponent cone in

172 Conversely, non-opponent parvocellular neurons showed the opposite tende

173 confirmed that this patient lacks a working opponent parvocellular system.

174 (iv) Overall, the contribution of the S-opponent path is doubled at the level of the striate cor

175 ganglion cell level, creating parallel color opponent pathways to the central visual system.

176 ructure of basal ganglia, is composed of two opponent pathways, direct and indirect, thought to selec

177 y to form red-green and blue-yellow spectral opponent pathways.

178 ction when players are uncertain about their opponents' payoff functions.

179 humans were also initially uninformed about opponent payoffs and could not communicate verbally.

180 , which was unexpected given that wavelength-opponent Pbeta ganglion cells are far more susceptible t

181 opponents when anger negatively affects the opponents' performances.

182 displacements, and these JONs subdivide into opponent populations that prefer push or pull displaceme

183 both analgesic signaling and a compensatory opponent process that generates endogenous opioid depend

184 n elevated-an interpretation consistent with opponent process theories of addiction.

185 Opponent process theory predicts that the first step in

186 ing effects have dissipated, consistent with opponent process theory, but the neural mechanisms invol

187 the prime colors and a simplified version of opponent process theory.

188 of relief closely follows the predictions of opponent process theory.

189 ine circuitry, providing a mechanism for the opponent process view of withdrawal.

190 ations include quantitative estimates of the opponent process weights needed to transform cone activa

191 Using these opponent process weights, the Munsell position of specif

192 about yellow adaptation reveals a spectrally opponent process which controls the phase shift.

193 This dual coding has parallels to 'opponent process' theories in psychology and promotes a

194 Counteradaptive processes, such as opponent process, that are part of the normal homeostati

195 We found that the macaque pACC has an opponent process-like organization of neurons representi

196 y distort cell-to-cell signalling, revealing opponent processes that may exist in individual cell typ

197 hese plots have implications for theories of opponent processes.

198 color components, thus concurring with color-opponent processing.

199 lization also limits the need to mobilize an opponent punishment learning system.

200 naptic pathways that create S versus LM cone-opponent receptive field structure remain controversial.

201 lay a rare, S-Off, (L + M)-On type of colour-opponent receptive field.

202 n of synaptic inputs, which generate a color-opponent receptive field.

203 larger than the center diameter of non-color opponent receptive fields at any eccentricity.

204 eatments with reduced discounting when their opponent reciprocates, but their levels of cooperation d

205 used spatially homogeneous isoluminant color opponent (red/green, blue/yellow) and hue versus achroma

206 on of cells (<10%) that exhibited spectrally opponent responses along the S-M axis.

207 d staining has shown that blue-ON/yellow-OFF opponent responses arise from a distinctive bistratified

208 detecting edges and generating chromatically opponent responses in colour vision.

209 nd one of the lateral accessory lobes showed opponent responses to moving visual stimuli.

210 alled JAMB (J-RGC), was found to have colour-opponent responses, OFF to ultraviolet (UV) light and ON

211 escribe a subset of cells that exhibit color opponent responses.

212 Painful events are suggested to elicit two opponent responses: a negatively valenced and a positive

213 We conclude that the opponent S-ON and LM-OFF responses originate from the ex

214 e central foveola, where S cones, and thus S opponent (S(o)) cell activity, are largely or entirely a

215 ven when there was no need to counteract the opponent's actions.

216 calls according to both their own and their opponent's attributes.

217 imitation depended on the visibility of the opponent's behavior.

218 heory predicts that animals should assess an opponent's condition relative to their own prior to esca

219 set the ratio between the player's and their opponent's expected payoff (extortionate strategies).

220 eir movement on each trial and observing the opponent's hand movement after a short delay.

221 rease in scent-marking and aggression in the opponent's home cage.

222 of mimicry and imitation, the expectation of opponent's mimicry and the reliance on similarity indice

223 inear relationship between her score and her opponent's score, and thus to achieve an unusual degree

224 l only knows its own size (or only knows its opponent's size).

225 versary requires the ability to mentalize an opponent's state of mind to anticipate his/her future be

226 f the Prisoner's Dilemma irrespective of the opponent's strategy (coercive strategies), or else to se

227 ills such as anticipating and countering the opponent's strategy and making effective decisions about

228 ate the impact of their own actions on their opponent's strategy.

229 se activity reflects the anticipation of the opponent's yet unknown choice, which may be important in

230 terior cingulate that selectively predict an opponent's yet unknown decision to invest in their commo

231 At each play, you and your opponent, say the mathematician John vonNeumann, each la

232 nals correlated with a behavioral measure of opponent-selective reinforcement learning.

233 r cingulate and right lingual regions, where opponent-selective reinforcement signals correlated with

234 These opponent-selective reinforcement signals were particular

235 hin a pair of related global patterns (e.g., opponent shapes and symmetric patterns), and during such

236 pment of reconciliation--affiliation between opponents shortly after a fight--because it influenceswh

237 We propose that the sparse, S-opponent signal in the lateral geniculate nucleus is amp

238 the primate retina carry a major blue-yellow opponent signal to the brain.

239 Importantly, the spectrally opponent signals (+sL and -sM) contribute to flicker nul

240 (+fM and +fL) may still generate spectrally opponent signals (+sM and +sL).

241 Importantly, these opponent signals allow responses in posterior regions to

242 bine the information encoded in these colour-opponent signals to reconstruct the full range of percei

243 one signal which is then integrated with L/M-opponent signals to rotate the lateral geniculate nucleu

244 uce "red-green" and "blue-yellow" spectrally opponent signals.

245 ural substrate for competition between these opponent social behaviours.

246 The results provide evidence that opponent social categories coactivate in face-processing

247 tly encountered, one ON and one OFF, had non-opponent spectral sensitivity, relatively high response

248 The tight spatial regulation of opponent splice variants helps ensure high-fidelity tran

249 Quinine may exert its effect as an opponent stimulus in the receptor cells at the second me

250 l column are predicted to be those shared by opponent stimulus pairs; this contrasts with the common

251 and relative similarity outperforms all the opponent strategies it was tested against, pushes noncoo

252 e optimal given his or her prediction of the opponents' strategies.

253 wed us to explore the dynamics of the colour-opponent subregions of P-cell receptive fields with a si

254 d in the receptive fields as oriented Double-Opponent subregions.

255 roperties of motion sensors are the key: the opponent subtraction of two oppositely tuned stages that

256 the absence of reconciliation between former opponents, suggesting that actors are sensitive to the c

257 ed aggression toward smaller non-threatening opponents, suggesting that males with low 5-HT are more

258 d reflected integration of S-cone inputs via opponent, summing, and intermediate configurations.

259 range of preferred directions, strong motion opponent suppression and a tuned normalization that may

260 Our successful models predict that motion-opponent suppression is the key mechanism to account for

261 tion sensitivity with dichoptic plaids, that opponent suppression precedes binocular integration, and

262 ion precedes binocular integration, and that opponent suppression will be stronger in inputs to patte

263 The spectrally opponent surround appears sluggish, with a long delay (a

264 ndicate the clear presence of the spectrally opponent surround even at 20 Hz.

265 e-ON cells are part of a "blue-yellow" color opponent system that is the evolutionary homolog of the

266 gested that dopamine and serotonin represent opponent systems respectively driving reward and punishm

267 by parallel, anatomically segregated colour-opponent systems, to be combined at a later stage of the

268 d by humans against two independent computer opponents that were randomly interleaved.

269 There are two opponent theories that provide an explanation for the me

270 nal temperature are encoded by bidirectional opponent thermoreceptor cells: some cells are excited by

271 This observation may cause the opponent to alter his next-period behavior, thus invalid

272 Evolutionary conflicts cause opponents to push increasingly hard and in opposite dire

273 f a strategy which uses reputation about its opponents to regulate its behavior.

274 it was tested against, pushes noncooperative opponents toward extinction, and promotes the developmen

275 he horizontal cell cannot be the locus of an opponent transformation in primates, including humans.

276 glion cells are also thought to serve colour opponent vision because the centre excitation is from a

277 ly and thereby establish a "red-green, color-opponent" visual pathway.

278 certain retinal ganglion cells have 'colour-opponent' visual responses-excited by light of one colou

279 When an opponent was not kin, agents evolved strategies that wer

280 pponent changed, compared with when the same opponent was repeated.

281 Opponents were anonymised but of known seniority.

282 ticular, they are more likely to anger their opponents when anger negatively affects the opponents' p

283 ck-paper-scissors games against computerized opponents while being scanned using fMRI.

284 ehaviour, such that they empathize with fair opponents while favouring the physical punishment of unf

285 All males that viewed an opponent with eyespots painted black became subordinate

286 L and M surround inputs, causing them to be opponent with respect to each other, but with reversed p

287 In contrast, males that viewed opponents with hidden eyespots (painted green) became do

288 y cone-opponent cells (48 of 83) were double-opponent, with circular receptive-field centers and cres

289 strategies can (i) deterministically set her opponent Y's score, independently of his strategy or res