MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of excitation and inactivation in area 17 on paired cells in area 18

2004· article· en· W2039588727 on OpenAlexaff
Y.-F. Tan, Frédéric Bretzner, F. Leporé, Stephen K. Itaya, Svetlana Shumikhina, Stéphane Molotchnikoff

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceptive fieldNeuroscienceStimulationVisual cortexGratingElectrophysiologyBiophysicsNeuronChemistryBiologyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This investigation examines how neighboring neurons of area 18 react when area 17 inputs are excited or depressed. In anesthetized cats, area 18 responses to a sine-wave grating in the receptive field were analyzed, while a second grating was positioned in its periphery and responses were recorded in area 17. This latter site was also inactivated with GABA. A waveform template process sorted out at least two individual, neighboring cells with similar orientation preferences in area 18. These cells frequently displayed opposite reactions to stimulation and inactivation in area 17. Experiments suggest that nearby neurons belonging to the same functional domain in the visual cortex may simultaneously carry disparate information.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207