MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stimuli outside the classical receptive field modulate the synchronization of action potentials between cells in visual cortex of cats

2000· article· en· W1984402993 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Bretzner, Jamila Aı̈toubah, Svetlana Shumikhina, Y-F Tan, Stéphane Molotchnikoff

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité TÉLUQUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceptive fieldNeuroscienceSynchronization (alternating current)Visual cortexCorrelogramAction (physics)CATSGratingOrientation (vector space)PsychologyCommunicationCortex (anatomy)PhysicsBiologyOpticsComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometryTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is proposed that various attributes of an image are bound neuronally when responsive units fire in synchrony. Our investigations describe the influences of the contextual stimuli upon the occurrence of synchronization, in anaesthetized cats. Once a significant synchronization was recorded in the cross-correlogram (XCRG) between evoked action potentials of two groups of neurons in response to a drifting sine-wave grating, additional gratings were positioned outside the compound receptive field. The synchronization strength was then measured in relation to the difference between the orientations of the central and peripheral gratings. In the majority of cases results indicate that the synchronization is facilitated with larger orientation disparities. Thus, our data support the notion that contrasting features of images facilitate synchrony of activity between 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207