MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Orientation Selectivity from Very Sparse LGN Inputs in a Comprehensive Model of Macaque V1 Cortex

2016· article· en· W2560236519 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Logan Chariker, Robert Shapley, Lai-Sang Young

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMacaqueVisual cortexNeuroscienceComputational modelOrientation (vector space)Feed forwardComputer sciencePopulationArtificial intelligencePsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new computational model of the primary visual cortex (V1) of the macaque monkey was constructed to reconcile the visual functions of V1 with anatomical data on its LGN input, the extreme sparseness of which presented serious challenges to theoretically sound explanations of cortical function. We demonstrate that, even with such sparse input, it is possible to produce robust orientation selectivity, as well as continuity in the orientation map. We went beyond that to find plausible dynamic regimes of our new model that emulate simultaneously experimental data for a wide range of V1 phenomena, beginning with orientation selectivity but also including diversity in neuronal responses, bimodal distributions of the modulation ratio (the simple/complex classification), and dynamic signatures, such as gamma-band oscillations. Intracortical interactions play a major role in all aspects of the visual functions of the model. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: We present the first realistic model that has captured the sparseness of magnocellular LGN inputs to the macaque primary visual cortex and successfully derived orientation selectivity from them. Three implications are (1) even in input layers to the visual cortex, the system is less feedforward and more dominated by intracortical signals than previously thought, (2) interactions among cortical neurons in local populations produce dynamics not explained by single neurons, and (3) such dynamics are important for function. Our model also shows that a comprehensive picture is necessary to explain function, because different visual properties are related. This study points to the need for paradigm shifts in neuroscience modeling: greater emphasis on population dynamics and, where possible, a move toward data-driven, comprehensive models.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations100
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207