MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021394691 · doi:10.1162/neco.2007.19.2.404

Fast Population Coding

2007· letter· en· W2021394691 on OpenAlexaff
Quentin J. M. Huys, Richard S. Zemel, Rama Natarajan, Peter Dayan

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Computation · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeural codingEncoderComputer scienceDecoding methodsStimulus (psychology)ComputationPopulationENCODETheoretical computer scienceModels of neural computationCoding (social sciences)Artificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkAlgorithmNeurosciencePsychologyMathematicsCognitive psychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncertainty coming from the noise in its neurons and the ill-posed nature of many tasks plagues neural computations. Maybe surprisingly, many studies show that the brain manipulates these forms of uncertainty in a probabilistically consistent and normative manner, and there is now a rich theoretical literature on the capabilities of populations of neurons to implement computations in the face of uncertainty. However, one major facet of uncertainty has received comparatively little attention: time. In a dynamic, rapidly changing world, data are only temporarily relevant. Here, we analyze the computational consequences of encoding stimulus trajectories in populations of neurons. For the most obvious, simple, instantaneous encoder, the correlations induced by natural, smooth stimuli engender a decoder that requires access to information that is nonlocal both in time and across neurons. This formally amounts to a ruinous representation. We show that there is an alternative encoder that is computationally and representationally powerful in which each spike contributes independent information; it is independently decodable, in other words. We suggest this as an appropriate foundation for understanding time-varying population codes. Furthermore, we show how adaptation to temporal stimulus statistics emerges directly from the demands of simple decoding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations69
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural ComputationSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207