The fractions of short- and long-range connections in the visual cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When analyzing synaptic connectivity in a brain tissue slice, it is difficult to discern between synapses made by local neurons and those arising from long-range axonal projections. We analyzed a data set of excitatory neurons and inhibitory basket cells reconstructed from cat primary visual cortex in an attempt to provide a quantitative answer to the question: What fraction of cortical synapses is local, and what fraction is mediated by long-range projections? We found an unexpectedly high proportion of nonlocal synapses. For example, 92% of excitatory synapses near the axis of a 200-microm-diameter iso-orientation column come from neurons located outside the column, and this fraction remains high--76%--even for an 800-micromocular dominance column. The long-range nature of connectivity has dramatic implications for experiments in cortical tissue slices. Our estimate indicates that in a 300-microm-thick section cut perpendicularly to the cortical surface, the number of viable excitatory synapses is reduced to about 10%, and the number of synapses made by inhibitory basket cell axons is reduced to 38%. This uneven reduction in the numbers of excitatory and inhibitory synapses changes the excitation-inhibition balance by a factor of 3.8 toward inhibition, and may result in cortical tissue that is less excitable than in vivo. We found that electrophysiological studies conducted in tissue sections may significantly underestimate the extent of cortical connectivity; for example, for some projections, the reported probabilities of finding connected nearby neuron pairs in slices could understate the in vivo probabilities by a factor of 3.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".