MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978638316 · doi:10.3389/neuro.10.005.2008

Modeling Thalamocortical Cell: Impact of Ca2+ Channel Distribution and Cell Geometry on Firing Pattern

2008· article· en· W1978638316 on OpenAlexafffund
Reza Zomorrodi

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Computational Neuroscience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSomaTonic (physiology)GeometryAmplitudeBurstingElectrophysiologyCompartment (ship)PhysicsBiophysicsConductanceChemistryCalcium channelNeuroscienceCalciumMathematicsBiologyOpticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of calcium channel distribution and geometry of the thalamocortical cell upon its tonic firing and the low threshold spike (LTS) generation was studied in a 3-compartment model, which represents soma, proximal and distal dendrites as well as in multi-compartment model using the morphology of a real reconstructed neuron. Using an uniform distribution of Ca(2+) channels, we determined the minimal number of low threshold voltage-activated calcium channels and their permeability required for the onset of LTS in response to a hyperpolarizing current pulse. In the 3-compartment model, we found that the channel distribution influences the firing pattern only in the range of 3% below the threshold value of total T-channel density. In the multi-compartmental model, the LTS could be generated by only 64% of unequally distributed T-channels compared to the minimal number of equally distributed T-channels. For a given channel density and injected current, the tonic firing frequency was found to be inversely proportional to the size of the cell. However, when the Ca(2+) channel density was elevated in soma or proximal dendrites, then the amplitude of LTS response and burst spike frequencies were determined by the ratio of total to threshold number of T-channels in the cell for a specific geometry.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations40
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Computational NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207