MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2479833819 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511499722.007

Sensory Input–Based Adaptation and Brain Architecture

2006· book-chapter· en· W2479833819 on OpenAlexaff
Maurice Ptito, Sébastien Desgent

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensory systemAdaptation (eye)NeuroscienceComputer scienceArchitectureSensory AdaptationCognitive scienceCommunicationPsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well established that brain development depends on the interaction between the basic components of the nervous system (nature) and the environment (nurture). This interaction, however, relies on a number of rules that could modify not only the organization of neural systems, but also their function. In this chapter, we report results on the plasticity of the visual system in animal and human models, using a variety of methodological approaches. In particular, we describe major findings regarding plasticity that result from modifications of the visual input through lesions in the various stages of the visual pathway (peripheral and central). Possible mechanisms for such neural reorganization are also discussed . NATURE VERSUS NURTURE: ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ON BRAIN PLASTICITY One of the oldest issues in modern psychology and biology concerns the nature versus nurture conundrum. Miscellaneous inquiries have been explored in this topic, such as “to what extent can genetic dispositions endow behaviors?” and “to what degree can the environment shape these?” It is well established that brain development depends on the interaction between the basic components of the nervous system (nature) and the stimulating environment (nurture). However, this interaction relies on a number of rules that could modify not only the organization of neural systems, but also their function. As we consider the main principles of evolution, we focus on the characteristics of the brain that are inheritable.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations22
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207