MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069729717 · doi:10.1152/jn.00619.2004

Using Heterogeneity to Predict Inhibitory Network Model Characteristics

2004· article· en· W2069729717 on OpenAlexaff
Frances K. Skinner, J.Y.J. Chung, Ignatious Ncube, Paul A. Murray, Sue Ann Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInhibitory postsynaptic potentialComputer sciencePopulationNetwork dynamicsBiological systemCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Network modelNeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From modeling studies it has been known for >10 years that purely inhibitory networks can produce synchronous output given appropriate balances of intrinsic and synaptic parameters. Several experimental studies indicate that synchronous activity produced by inhibitory networks is critical to the production of population rhythms associated with various behavioral states. Heterogeneity of inputs to inhibitory networks strongly affect their ability to synchronize. In this paper, we explore how the amount of input heterogeneity to two-cell inhibitory networks affects their dynamics. Using numerical simulations and bifurcation analyses, we find that the ability of inhibitory networks to synchronize in the face of heterogeneity depends nonmonotonically on each of the synaptic time constant, synaptic conductance and external drive parameters. Because of this, an optimal set of parameters for a given cellular model with various biophysical characteristics can be determined. We suggest that this could be a helpful approach to use in determining the importance of different, underlying biophysical details. We further find that two-cell coherence properties are maintained in larger 10-cell networks. As such, we think that a strategy of "embedding" small network dynamics in larger networks is a useful way to understand the contribution of biophysically derived parameters to population dynamics in large networks.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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