MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2936201809 · doi:10.1101/605592

Dynamic changes in Anterior Cingulate Cortex ensembles mark the transition from exploration to exploitation

2019· preprint· en· W2936201809 on OpenAlexaff
Eldon Emberly, K Seamans Jeremy

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnterior cingulate cortexPsychologyLeverValue (mathematics)NeuroscienceProcess (computing)Representation (politics)Error-related negativityCingulate cortexCognitive psychologyComputer scienceCognitionMachine learningPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The ability to acquire knowledge about the value of stimuli or actions factors into simple foraging behaviors as well as complex forms of decision making. The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is thought to be involved in these processes, although the manner in which neural representations acquire value is unclear. Here we recorded from ensembles of ACC neurons as rats learned which of 3 levers was rewarded each day through a trial and error process. Action representations remained largely stable during exploration, but there was an abrupt, coordinated and differential change in the representation of rewarded and nonrewarded levers by ACC neurons at the point where the rat realized which lever was rewarded and began to exploit it. Thus, rather than a gradual, incremental process, value learning in ACC can occur in an all-or-none manner and help to initiate strategic shifts in forging behavior.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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