MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060101880 · doi:10.1186/1471-2202-8-s2-s26

Stimulus encoding and correlates with behavior in area MT of visual cortex is dependent on spike phase

2007· article· en· W2060101880 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Y. Masse, Erik P. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neuroscience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)NeurosciencePerceptionSensory systemVisual cortexMotion perceptionReceptive fieldPsychologyLocal field potentialENCODENeuronVisual perceptionBiologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How is the activity of neurons in the sensory areas of cortex related to our perceptual abilities? Past studies have suggested that sensory neurons that best encode a visual stimulus are also more influential in forming the perception of the stimulus. We wanted to know if this relationship also extended to individual action potentials. If some spikes encode the stimulus better than others, then would these same spikes have more weight in supporting the perceptual behavior? To address this question, data from a past motion detection experiment was analyzed [1]. In this study, two monkeys were trained to detect the onset of coherent motion in a random dot patch that initially contained 0% coherent motion. The coherent motion signal occurred at a random time and the animals were rewarded for responding within a 750 ms window. Extracellular recordings were made from single neurons in the Middle Temporal (MT) area. The random dot patch overlapped the receptive field of the neuron and the coherent motion was matched to the neuron's preferred direction and speed. Importantly, the position of the random dots was only updated once every 27 ms. Because of the slow motion update rate, the neural activity of many of the MT neurons oscillated at the same frequency as the motion updates. It was these oscillations that allowed us to ask if some spikes were more influential than others by measuring how sensory and choice related information varied as a function of the phase of the oscillation. To determine whether some spikes encoded the stimulus better than others, we examined the difference between spikes on the rising phase of the oscillation (from the trough to the peak) compared to spikes on the falling phase (peak to trough). Using the spike-triggered average of the motion stimulus, we found that spikes did not equally represent sensory information. Spikes occurring during the rising phase of the stimulus-induced oscillation encoded stronger motion than spikes occurring during the falling phase. Importantly, the same spikes that encoded stronger motion were also more correlated with the animal's behavioral performance and reaction time. This suggests that the spikes carrying the most reliable task related information are more strongly linked to the behavioral decision. In addition, these results support the hypothesis that phase could be used as a possible encoding scheme during neuronal oscillations.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207