MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168088825 · doi:10.1152/jn.00643.2004

Cross-Correlation and Joint Spectro-Temporal Receptive Field Properties in Auditory Cortex

2004· article· en· W2168088825 on OpenAlexaff
Masahiko Tomita, Jos J. Eggermont

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceptive fieldStimulus (psychology)StimulationAuditory cortexNeuroscienceCorrelationCortical neuronsPsychologyCommunicationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recordings were made from the right primary auditory cortex in 17 adult cats using two eight-electrode arrays. We recorded the neural activity under spontaneous firing conditions and during random, multi-frequency stimulation, at 65 dB SPL, from the same units. Multiple single-unit (MSU) recordings (281) were stationary through 900 s of silence and during 900 s of stimulation. The cross-correlograms of 545 MSU pairs with peak lag times within 10 ms from zero lag time were analyzed. Stimulation reduced the correlation in background activity, and as a result, the signal-to-noise ratio of correlated activity in response to the stimulus was enhanced. Reconstructed spectro-temporal receptive fields (STRFs) for coincident spikes showed larger STRF overlaps, suggesting that coincident neural activity serves to sharpen the resolution in the spectro-temporal domain. The cross-correlation for spikes contributing to the STRF depended much stronger on the STRF overlap than the cross-correlation during either silence or for spikes that did not contribute to the STRF (OUT-STRF). Compared with that for firings during silence, the cross-correlation for the OUT-STRF spikes was much reduced despite the unchanged firing rate. This suggests that stimulation breaks up the large neural assembly that exists during long periods of silence into a stimulus related one and maybe several others. As a result, the OUT-STRF spikes of the unit pairs, now likely distributed across several assemblies, are less correlated than during long periods of silence. Thus the ongoing network activity is significantly different from that during stimulation and changes afterng arousal during stimulation.

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 score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations53
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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