MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Breakthroughs in Understanding the Role of Functional Interactions between the Neocortex and the Claustrum

2017· review· en· W2777736219 on OpenAlexaff
Solange P. Brown, Brian N. Mathur, Shawn R. Olsen, Pierre‐Hervé Luppi, Martha E. Bickford, Ami Citri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersNational Eye InstituteNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueIsrael Science FoundationNational Institute for Psychobiology in Israel, Hebrew University of JerusalemNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and DepressionJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsClaustrumNeocortexNeurosciencePrefrontal cortexSensory systemPsychologyCortex (anatomy)CognitionBiologyCognitive scienceNucleus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Almost all areas of the neocortex are connected with the claustrum, a nucleus located between the neocortex and the striatum, yet the functions of corticoclaustral and claustrocortical connections remain largely obscure. As major efforts to model the neocortex are currently underway, it has become increasingly important to incorporate the corticoclaustral system into theories of cortical function. This Mini-Symposium was motivated by a series of recent studies which have sparked new hypotheses regarding the function of claustral circuits. Anatomical, ultrastructural, and functional studies indicate that the claustrum is most highly interconnected with prefrontal cortex, suggesting important roles in higher cognitive processing, and that the organization of the corticoclaustral system is distinct from the driver/modulator framework often used to describe the corticothalamic system. Recent findings supporting roles in detecting novel sensory stimuli, directing attention and setting behavioral states, were the subject of the Mini-Symposium at the 2017 Society for Neuroscience Annual Meeting.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.144 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations70
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207