Parallel Coding of First- and Second-Order Stimulus Attributes by Midbrain Electrosensory Neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural stimuli often have time-varying first-order (i.e., mean) and second-order (i.e., variance) attributes that each carry critical information for perception and can vary independently over orders of magnitude. Experiments have shown that sensory systems continuously adapt their responses based on changes in each of these attributes. This adaptation creates ambiguity in the neural code as multiple stimuli may elicit the same neural response. While parallel processing of first- and second-order attributes by separate neural pathways is sufficient to remove this ambiguity, the existence of such pathways and the neural circuits that mediate their emergence have not been uncovered to date. We recorded the responses of midbrain electrosensory neurons in the weakly electric fish Apteronotus leptorhynchus to stimuli with first- and second-order attributes that varied independently in time. We found three distinct groups of midbrain neurons: the first group responded to both first- and second-order attributes, the second group responded selectively to first-order attributes, and the last group responded selectively to second-order attributes. In contrast, all afferent hindbrain neurons responded to both first- and second-order attributes. Using computational analyses, we show how inputs from a heterogeneous population of ON- and OFF-type afferent neurons are combined to give rise to response selectivity to either first- or second-order stimulus attributes in midbrain neurons. Our study thus uncovers, for the first time, generic and widely applicable mechanisms by which parallel processing of first- and second-order stimulus attributes emerges in the brain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".