A Large Lateral Craniotomy Procedure for Mesoscale Wide-field Optical Imaging of Brain Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The craniotomy is a commonly performed procedure to expose the brain for in vivo experiments. In mouse research, most labs utilize a small craniotomy, typically 3 mm x 3 mm. This protocol introduces a method for creating a substantially larger 7 mm x 6 mm cranial window exposing most of a cerebral hemisphere over the mouse temporal and parietal cortices (e.g., bregma 2.5 - 4.5 mm, lateral 0 - 6 mm). To perform this surgery, the head must be tilted approximately 30° and much of the temporal muscle must be retracted. Due to the large amount of bone removal, this procedure is intended only for acute experiments with the animal anesthetized throughout the surgery and experiment. The main advantage of this innovative large lateral cranial window is to provide simultaneous access to both medial and lateral areas of the cortex. This large unilateral cranial window can be used to study the neural dynamics between cells, as well as between different cortical areas by combining multi-electrode electrophysiological recordings, imaging of neuronal activity (e.g., intrinsic or extrinsic imaging), and optogenetic stimulation. Additionally, this large craniotomy also exposes a large area of cortical blood vessels, allowing for direct manipulation of the lateral cortical vasculature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".