Simple, biologically-constrained CA1 pyramidal cell models using an intact, whole hippocampus context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hippocampus is a heavily studied brain structure due to its involvement in learning and memory. Detailed models of excitatory, pyramidal cells in hippocampus have been developed using a range of experimental data. These models have been used to help us understand, for example, the effects of synaptic integration and voltage gated channel densities and distributions on cellular responses. However, these cellular outputs need to be considered from the perspective of the networks in which they are embedded. Using modeling approaches, if cellular representations are too detailed, it quickly becomes computationally unwieldy to explore large network simulations. Thus, simple models are preferable, but at the same time they need to have a clear, experimental basis so as to allow physiologically based understandings to emerge. In this article, we describe the development of simple models of CA1 pyramidal cells, as derived in a well-defined experimental context of an intact, whole hippocampus preparation expressing population oscillations. These models are based on the intrinsic properties and frequency-current profiles of CA1 pyramidal cells, and can be used to build, fully examine, and analyze large networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".