MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Oscillatory Activity in Entorhinal Neurons and Circuits: Mechanisms and Function

2000· review· en· W1964004822 on OpenAlexaff
Clayton T. Dickson, Jacopo Magistretti, Mark H. Shalinsky, Bassam Hamam, Ángel Alonso

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntorhinal cortexNeuroscienceDepolarizationSubthreshold conductionHippocampusBiological neural networkLayer (electronics)Excitatory postsynaptic potentialPopulationSensory systemNetwork layerPhysicsHippocampal formationChemistryElectrophysiologyBiophysicsBiologyInhibitory postsynaptic potentialTransistor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Layers II and V of the entorhinal cortex (EC) occupy a privileged anatomical position in the temporal lobe memory system that allows them to gate the main flow of information in and out of the hippocampus, respectively. In vivo studies have shown that layer II of the EC is a robust generator of theta as well as gamma activity. Theta may also be present in layer V, but the layer V network is particularly prone to genesis of short-lasting high-frequency oscillations ("ripples"). Interestingly, in vitro studies have shown that EC layers II and V, but not layer III, have the potential to act as independent pacemakers of population oscillatory activity. Moreover, it has also been shown that subgroups of principal neurons both within layers II and V, but not layer III, are endowed with autorhythmic properties. These are characterized by subthreshold oscillations where the depolarizing phase is driven by the activation of "persistent" Na+ channels. We propose that the oscillatory properties of layer II and V neurons and local circuits are responsible for setting up the proper temporal dynamics for the coordination of the multiple sensory inputs that converge onto EC and thus help to generate sensory representations and memory encoding.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.287
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.101 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations103
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207