Corticofugal Modulation of Initial Neural Processing of Sound Information from the Ipsilateral Ear in the Mouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cortical neurons implement a high frequency-specific modulation of subcortical nuclei that includes the cochlear nucleus. Anatomical studies show that corticofugal fibers terminating in the auditory thalamus and midbrain are mostly ipsilateral. Differently, corticofugal fibers terminating in the cochlear nucleus are bilateral, which fits to the needs of binaural hearing that improves hearing quality. This leads to our hypothesis that corticofugal modulation of initial neural processing of sound information from the contralateral and ipsilateral ears could be equivalent or coordinated at the first sound processing level. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: With the focal electrical stimulation of the auditory cortex and single unit recording, this study examined corticofugal modulation of the ipsilateral cochlear nucleus. The same methods and procedures as described in our previous study of corticofugal modulation of contralateral cochlear nucleus were employed simply for comparison. We found that focal electrical stimulation of cortical neurons induced substantial changes in the response magnitude, response latency and receptive field of ipsilateral cochlear nucleus neurons. Cortical stimulation facilitated auditory response and shortened the response latency of physiologically matched neurons whereas it inhibited auditory response and lengthened the response latency of unmatched neurons. Finally, cortical stimulation shifted the best frequencies of cochlear neurons towards those of stimulated cortical neurons. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that cortical neurons enable a high frequency-specific remodelling of sound information processing in the ipsilateral cochlear nucleus in the same manner as that in the contralateral cochlear nucleus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".