MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A Model of Intracellular Theta Phase Precession Dependent on Intrinsic Subthreshold Membrane Currents

2011· article· en· W2168726488 on OpenAlexafffund
L. Stan Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPrecessionPhysicsExcitatory postsynaptic potentialAmplitudePhase (matter)Local field potentialDepolarizationSubthreshold conductionIntracellularInhibitory postsynaptic potentialNeuroscienceNuclear magnetic resonanceBiophysicsChemistryCondensed matter physicsVoltageBiologyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hippocampal place cell fires at an increasingly earlier phase in relation to the extracellular theta rhythm as a rodent moves through the place field. The present report presents a compartment model of a CA1 pyramidal cell that explains the increase in amplitude and the phase precession of intracellular theta oscillations, with the assumption that the cell receives an asymmetric ramp depolarization (<10 mV) in the place field and rhythmic inhibitory and/or excitatory synaptic driving. Intracellular subthreshold membrane potential oscillations (MPOs) increase in amplitude and frequency, and show phase precession within the place field. Theta phase precession and MPO power and frequency increase in the place field are caused by a shift in excitatory-inhibitory response, intrinsic theta-frequency resonance, and intrinsic oscillations that depend on voltage-dependent persistent Na(+) and slowly inactivating K(+) currents, but not on I(h). Phase precession is diminished when theta-frequency resonance is decreased. Simulated spikes fire near the peak of MPOs and precess similarly as the MPOs. The phase of the MPOs/spikes codes for distance in a one-dimensional place field, and phase precession is only weakly dependent on firing rate, running speed, or the duration needed to cross the place field. In addition, phase precession within the place field resumes quickly after disruption by maximal afferent pulse 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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience→Same topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research→French-language works237,207→