MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555865722 · doi:10.1101/081125

Inferring Synaptic Excitation/Inhibition Balance from Field Potentials

2016· preprint· en· W2555865722 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Richard Gao, Erik Peterson, Bradley Voytek

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of California, San Diego
KeywordsComputationElectrocorticographyLocal field potentialBalance (ability)MacaqueComputer scienceNeuroscienceField (mathematics)ExcitationSpike (software development)Artificial intelligenceStatistical physicsElectroencephalographyAlgorithmPsychologyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Neural circuits sit in a dynamic balance between excitation (E) and inhibition (I). Fluctuations in this E:I balance have been shown to influence neural computation, working memory, and information processing. While more drastic shifts and aberrant E:I patterns are implicated in numerous neurological and psychiatric disorders, current methods for measuring E:I dynamics require invasive procedures that are difficult to perform in behaving animals, and nearly impossible in humans. This has limited the ability to examine the full impact that E:I shifts have in neural computation and disease. In this study, we develop a computational model to show that E:I ratio can be estimated from the power law exponent (slope) of the electrophysiological power spectrum, and validate this relationship using previously published datasets from two species (rat local field potential and macaque electrocorticography). This simple method--one that can be applied retrospectively to existing data--removes a major hurdle in understanding a currently difficult to measure, yet fundamental, aspect of neural computation.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations37
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207