MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027148286 · doi:10.1167/11.11.1267

Spike count correlations between primate dorsolateral prefrontal cortex neurons during a spatial working memory task

2011· article· en· W2027148286 on OpenAlexaff
Julio Martínez-Trujillo, Matthew L. Leavitt, Megan Schneiderman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorking memoryNeuroscienceSaccadePrimateStimulus (psychology)Prefrontal cortexDorsolateral prefrontal cortexSpatial memoryPsychologyCognitionAudiologyEye movementMedicineCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been shown that neurons in the primate prefrontal cortex encode information during the delay period of working memory tasks for spatial locations, however it remains unclear whether and how these units interact with each other. We examined this question by recording single cell responses from microelectrode arrays (each array = 96 microelectrodes, Blackrock Inc., UT) implanted in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (area 8v) of two macaca fascicularis during a working memory task, and measuring spike count correlations between the recorded units. During trials the animals fixated on a central spot for 494 to 800 ms, then a circular sine wave grating was presented at one of 16 randomly selected locations for 507 ms. The offset of the grating was followed by a delay period that could last between 494 and 2000 ms and ended with the offset of the central fixation point. This latter event instructed the animals to make a saccade to the remembered location of the previously presented grating. The spiking activity of neurons was simultaneously recorded in blocks of 32 channels and sorted using Plexon software (Plexon Inc, TX). We recorded from 20 well isolated single units for a total of 190 neuronal pairs. We found that spike rate correlations between the pairs computed across all target locations were significantly higher during the delay period (r = 0.13) than during the stimulus presentation period (r = 0.04) (p < 0.01, paired t-test). Our results suggest that interactions between neurons in the dlPFC increase during working memory maintenance in the absence of visual inputs. Such interactions may be critical for working memory encoding by neuronal populations within the area.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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