MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Corticofugal reorganization of the midbrain tonotopic map in mice

2001· article· en· W2072430642 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Yan, Günter Ehret

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTonotopyMidbrainAuditory cortexNeuroscienceCortex (anatomy)Inferior colliculusNeuroplasticityAuditory systemBiologyCerebral cortexCentral nervous systemNucleus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have indicated that frequency maps (tonotopies) in mammalian auditory brain centers are plastic. Here, we examined this plasticity in the mouse auditory midbrain through focal stimulation of the primary auditory cortex. Cortical activation shifted midbrain frequency tunings toward the best frequencies of the stimulated cortical neurons if these were either higher or lower than the cortical ones. Such corticofugal adjustments appear to minimize the difference between cortical and collicular frequency tuning within the critical bandwidths of the auditory system. Consequently, the neural representation is enhanced for the frequencies to which the cortical neurons were tuned. Our data suggest that the auditory cortex reorganizes midbrain tonotopy on the basis of which cortical frequencies are stimulated, mostly probably through corticofugal projections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations67
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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