MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547553475 · doi:10.2741/s472

The dendritic tree a mathematical integrator

2016· review· en· W2547553475 on OpenAlexaff
Lyes Bachatene

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Bioscience-Scholar · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceStimulus (psychology)Visual cortexExcitatory postsynaptic potentialSummationInhibitory postsynaptic potentialSurround suppressionIntegratorCortical neuronsComputer scienceSpatial frequencyVisual perceptionPsychologyPhysicsStimulationCognitive psychologyPerceptionOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurons in the primary visual cortex (V1) are sensitive to simple features of the visual scene such as contrast, spatial frequency or orientations. In higher mammals, they are organized into columns of orientation-preference, whereas such organization is absent in rodents. However, in both types of organization, neurons can be highly selective or poorly selective for a particular stimulus. In mouse V1, it has been shown that all stimuli are represented on the dendritic tree of single neurons. To what extent this concept is applicable in higher mammals? In this review, we discuss possible models of integrating visual information from visual cortical neurons. In particular, how the modulation of the number of inputs and/or the frequency firing can explain the orientation selectivity in V1. Based on our findings and literature, we propose three different hypotheses namely the spatial summation, the temporal summation and the excitation-inhibition. In addition, we discuss the possible interactions between excitatory pyramidal neurons and inhibitory interneurons during stimulus processing.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
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)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Bioscience-ScholarSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207