MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140999596 · doi:10.1242/jeb.010322

Control of neuronal firing by dynamic parallel fiber feedback:implications for electrosensory reafference suppression

2007· article· en· W2140999596 on OpenAlexaff
John E. Lewis, Benjamin Lindner, Benoit Laliberté, Sally Groothuis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish biology, ecology, and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHebbian theoryParallel fiberNeuroscienceElectric fishFiberMossy fiber (hippocampus)Monotonic functionSensory systemComputer scienceSynaptic plasticityPhysicsBiological systemControl theory (sociology)ChemistryMathematicsInhibitory postsynaptic potentialExcitatory postsynaptic potentialBiologyArtificial neural networkFish <Actinopterygii>Artificial intelligenceHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cancellation of self-generated components of sensory inputs is a key function of sensory feedback pathways. In many systems, cerebellar parallel fiber feedback mediates this cancellation through anti-Hebbian plasticity, resulting in the generation of a negative image of the reafferent inputs. Parallel fiber feedback involves direct excitation and disynaptic inhibition as well as synaptic plasticity on multiple time scales. How the dynamics of these processes interact with anti-Hebbian plasticity to shape synaptic inputs and provide a cancellation mechanism remains unclear. In the present study, we investigated the influence of parallel fiber feedback onto pyramidal neurons of the electrosensory lateral line lobe (ELL) in weakly electric fish under open loop conditions. We mimicked naturalistic parallel fiber inputs in an ELL brain slice by implementing an experimentally based model of this synaptic pathway using dynamic clamp. We showed that as parallel fiber activity increases, the effective input to ELL pyramidal neurons changes from net excitation to net inhibition, resulting in a non-monotonic firing response. Using a model neuron, we found that this robust non-monotonic response is due to a shift from balanced excitation and inhibition at low parallel fiber input rates, to dominant inhibition at high input rates. We then showed that this non-monotonic response provides a simple basis for negative image generation. Through changes in the mean activation rate of parallel fibers, the feedback can switch roles between enhancement and suppression of sensory inputs in a manner that is directly determined by the slope of the non-monotonic response curve.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicFish biology, ecology, and behaviorFrench-language works237,207