MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1598346198 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2003.1280139

Principal dynamic mode analysis of a spider mechanoreceptor action potentials

2004· article· en· W1598346198 on OpenAlexaff
Georgios D. Mitsis, Spiros H. Courellis, Andrew S. French, Vasilis Z. Marmarelis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanoreceptorNonlinear systemComputer scienceBiological systemConvolution (computer science)Action (physics)Mode (computer interface)PhysicsAlgorithmControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkNeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nonlinear dynamics of a spider mechanoreceptor are examined using the principal dynamic mode (PDM) methodology. The cuticilar sense organ of an adult Cupiennius Salei spider was stimulated with a pseudorandom Gaussian process spectrally bound at 400 Hz and the resulting action potentials were recorded. Data analysis reveals three PDMs that describe the system dynamics, based on the second order Volterra kernel, which is estimated from the recorded input/output datasets. The first PDM exhibits high-pass behavior, illustrating the importance of the speed of the slit displacement to the mechanoreceptor, while the other two PDMs exhibit bandpass behavior. The probability of firing an action potential is represented by a static multiple-input nonlinearity that receives the values of the convolution of each mode with the pseudorandom input as its inputs. The probability of firing function exhibits asymmetric behavior with respect to its arguments, suggesting directional dependence of the mechanoreceptor response on the PDM outputs. Trigger regions for a probability threshold value of 0.1 are also presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research→French-language works237,207→