MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967939301 · doi:10.1103/physreve.80.041912

Dynamics of driven recurrent networks of ON and OFF cells

2009· article· en· W1967939301 on OpenAlexafffund
Jérémie Lefebvre, André Longtin, Victor G. LeBlanc

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)Excitatory postsynaptic potentialPhysicsAmplitudeInhibitory postsynaptic potentialHopf bifurcationBifurcationControl theory (sociology)NeuroscienceStatistical physicsBiological systemMathematicsComputer scienceNonlinear systemBiologyOpticsQuantum mechanicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A globally coupled network of ON and OFF cells is studied using neural field theory. ON cells increase their activity when the amplitude of an external stimulus increases, while OFF cells do the opposite given the same stimulus. Theory predicts that, without input, multiple transitions to oscillations can occur depending on feedback delay and the difference between ON and OFF resting states. Static spatial stimuli can induce or suppress global oscillations via a Andronov-Hopf bifurcation. This is the case for either polarity of such stimuli. In contrast, only excitatory inputs can induce or suppress oscillations in an equivalent network built of ON cells only even though oscillations are more prevalent in such systems. Nonmonotonic responses to local stimuli occur where responses lateral to the stimulus switch from excitatory to inhibitory as the input amplitude increases. With local time-periodic forcing, the unforced cells oscillate at twice the driving frequency via full-wave rectification mediated by the feedback. Our results agree with simulations of the neural field model, and further, qualitative agreement is found with the behavior of a network of spiking stochastic integrate-and-fire model neurons.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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