Symposium S01: Molecules and mechanisms in Schwann cell development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
persistent potentiation and depression of specific retinotectal and intratectal synapses.Interestingly, activity-induced synaptic modifications in vivo are quickly reversed by either subsequent spontaneous activity in the tectum or exposure to random visual inputs.Such reversal depends on the activation of the NMDA subtype of glutamate receptors and postsynaptic protein phosphotases.However, stabilization of synaptic modifications can be achieved by an appropriately spaced pattern of visual stimuli.Taken together, these findings underscore the importance of spike timing-dependent synaptic plasticity and suggest a temporal constraint on the pattern of sensory inputs for effective modification of developing neural circuits.Correlated spiking of pre-and postsynaptic neurons can result in strengthening or weakening of glutamatergic and GABAergic synapses, depending on the order of and/or the time interval between the pre-and postsynaptic spiking.The functional significance of this synaptic modification is illustrated by the experience-dependent development of Xenopus retinotectal system.Activity-induced modification of retinotectal synapses underlies the refinement of the receptive field of tectal neurons, a process involving a progressive matching of excitatory (retinotectal) and inhibitory (intratectal) inputs to the tectal neuron.Furthermore, the receptive field properties can also be rapidly 'trained' by conditioning visual stimuli through a selective and
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".