MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086532612 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1306428110

Speed-invariant encoding of looming object distance requires power law spike rate adaptation

2013· article· en· W2086532612 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen E. Clarke, Richard Naud, André Longtin, Leonard Maler

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish biology, ecology, and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLoomingElectric fishStimulus (psychology)Invariant (physics)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceAfferentPower lawNeuroscienceComputer visionCommunicationMathematicsControl theory (sociology)PhysicsBiologyPsychologyOpticsStatisticsFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural representations of a moving object's distance and approach speed are essential for determining appropriate orienting responses, such as those observed in the localization behaviors of the weakly electric fish, Apteronotus leptorhynchus. We demonstrate that a power law form of spike rate adaptation transforms an electroreceptor afferent's response to "looming" object motion, effectively parsing information about distance and approach speed into distinct measures of the firing rate. Neurons with dynamics characterized by fixed time scales are shown to confound estimates of object distance and speed. Conversely, power law adaptation modifies an electroreceptor afferent's response according to the time scales present in the stimulus, generating a rate code for looming object distance that is invariant to speed and acceleration. Consequently, estimates of both object distance and approach speed can be uniquely determined from an electroreceptor afferent's firing rate, a multiplexed neural code operating over the extended time scales associated with behaviorally relevant stimuli.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicFish biology, ecology, and behaviorFrench-language works237,207