MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005283617 · doi:10.1152/jn.90392.2008

Functional Architecture and Spike Timing Properties of Corticofugal Projections From Rat Ventral Temporal Cortex

2008· article· en· W2005283617 on OpenAlexaff
Taylor Chomiak, Sören Peters, Bin Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceSensory systemTemporal lobeSensory processingCortex (anatomy)BiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensory association and parahippocampal cortex in the ventral temporal lobe plays an important role in sensory object recognition and control of top-down attention. Although layer V neurons located in high-order cortical structures project to multiple cortical and subcortical regions, the architecture and functional organization of this large axonal network are poorly understood. Using a large in vitro slice preparation, we examined the functional organization and spike timing properties of the descending layer V axonal network. We found that most, if not all, layer V neurons in this region can form multiple axonal pathways that project to many brain structures, both proximal and remote. The conduction velocities of different axonal pathways are highly diverse and can vary up to more than threefold. Nevertheless for those axonal projections on the ipsilateral side, the speeds of axonal conduction appear to be tuned to their length. As such, spike delivery becomes nearly isochronic along these pathways regardless of projection distance. In contrast, axons projecting to the contralateral hemisphere are significantly slower and do not participate in this lateralized isochronicity. These structural and functional features of layer V network from the ventral temporal lobe may play an important role in top-down control of sensory cue processing and attention.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations34
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207