MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2944014200 · doi:10.11575/prism/36501

The Universal Critical Dynamics of Noisy Neurons

2019· dissertation· en· W2944014200 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel J. Korchinski

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsDynamics (music)Statistical physicsNeuroscienceCognitive scienceComputer scienceBiologyPhysicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The criticality hypothesis posits that the brain operates near a critical point. Typically, critical neurons are assumed to spread activity like a simple branching process and thus fall into the universality class of directed percolation. The branching process describes activity spreading from a single initiation site, an assumption that can be violated in real neurons where external drivers and noise can initiate multiple concurrent and independent cascades. In this thesis, I use the network structure of neurons to disentangle independent cascades of activity. Using a combination of numerical simulations and mathematical modelling, I show that criticality can exist in noisy neurons but that the presence of noise changes the underlying universality class from directed to undirected percolation. Directed percolation describes only small scale distributions of activity, on larger scales cascades can merge together and undirected percolation is the appropriate description.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→