MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965890900 · doi:10.1103/physreve.78.021911

Driving neural oscillations with correlated spatial input and topographic feedback

2008· article· en· W1965890900 on OpenAlexafffund
Axel Hutt, Connie Sutherland, André Longtin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCoupling (piping)PhysicsStatistical physicsSpectral densityNegative feedbackNoise (video)Range (aeronautics)Spatial correlationControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceMathematicsBiological systemQuantum mechanicsVoltageTelecommunicationsMaterials scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider how oscillatory activity in networks of excitable systems depends on spatial correlations of random inputs and the spatial range of feedback coupling. Analysis of a neural field model with topographic delayed recurrent feedback reveals how oscillations in certain frequency bands, including the gamma band, are enhanced by increases in the input correlation length. Further, the enhancement is maximal when this length exceeds the feedback coupling range. Suppression of oscillatory power occurs concomitantly in other bands. These effects depend solely on the ratio of input and feedback length scales. The precise positions of these bands are determined by the synaptic constants and the delays. The results agree with numerical simulations of the model and of a network of stochastic spiking neurons, and are expected for any noise-driven excitable element networks.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations20
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207