MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975076522 · doi:10.1167/14.10.1408

Impact of pulvinar on contrast response functions in the primary visual cortex

2014· article· en· W1975076522 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Casanova, Jimmy Shiu Ming Lai, Sébastien Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual cortexReceptive fieldNeuroscienceThalamusStimulus (psychology)StimulationContrast (vision)Visual systemPsychologyChemistryPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pulvinar, the largest extrageniculate thalamic visual nucleus, establishes reciprocal connections with virtually all the visual cortical areas of the brain. The pulvinar is thus in a strategic position to influence different levels of cortical processing through "driver" or "modulatory" synapses. It is generally considered that, in all species, projections from the pulvinar to the primary visual cortex (V1) are modulatory, altering decoding properties of neurons without changing their basic receptive field properties. Results from our laboratory, based on optical imaging responses evoked by electrical stimulation, support this assumption to some extent (Vanni et al. 2011, Soc. Neurosci. Abstr.). We further investigated this issue by recordings cells in V1 during the reversible inactivation of the lateral posterior nucleus (LP) - pulvinar complex in the cat. Neurons in V1 were recorded before, during and after the inactivation of the striato-recipient zone of the LP-pulvinar complex with microinjections of GABA. Recording and injection electrodes were positioned such that thalamic and cortical receptive fields overlapped. No change in the preferred orientation or direction selectivity of V1 neurons was observed during pulvinar inactivation. However, for a majority of the cells tested (n=39/58), the response amplitude to the optimal stimulus was reduced by a mean of 66%. The contrast response function of neurons was modeled with the Naka-Rushton function: Rmax(Cn/Cn+Cn50)+b. Analysis of the effects of pulvinar inactivation on the contrast response function of V1 cells revealed the existence of at least three types of modulation. These modulations were classified according to the predominantly affected curve parameter: Nine cells exhibited a decrease in Rmax, five cells had an increase in the exponential factor (n), and four units had a C50 increase. These results indicate that the pulvinar can modulate the activity of V1 neurons by modifying the profile of their contrast response function. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2014

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207