Emerging ideas and tools to study the emergent properties of the cortical neural circuits for voluntary motor control in non-human primates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For years, neurophysiological studies of the cerebral cortical mechanisms of voluntary motor control were limited to single-electrode recordings of the activity of one or a few neurons at a time. This approach was supported by the widely accepted belief that single neurons were the fundamental computational units of the brain (the "neuron doctrine"). Experiments were guided by motor-control models that proposed that the motor system attempted to plan and control specific parameters of a desired action, such as the direction, speed or causal forces of a reaching movement in specific coordinate frameworks, and that assumed that the controlled parameters would be expressed in the task-related activity of single neurons. The advent of chronically implanted multi-electrode arrays about 20 years ago permitted the simultaneous recording of the activity of many neurons. This greatly enhanced the ability to study neural control mechanisms at the population level. It has also shifted the focus of the analysis of neural activity from quantifying single-neuron correlates with different movement parameters to probing the structure of multi-neuron activity patterns to identify the emergent computational properties of cortical neural circuits. In particular, recent advances in "dimension reduction" algorithms have attempted to identify specific covariance patterns in multi-neuron activity which are presumed to reflect the underlying computational processes by which neural circuits convert the intention to perform a particular movement into the required causal descending motor commands. These analyses have led to many new perspectives and insights on how cortical motor circuits covertly plan and prepare to initiate a movement without causing muscle contractions, transition from preparation to overt execution of the desired movement, generate muscle-centered motor output commands, and learn new motor skills. Progress is also being made to import optical-imaging and optogenetic toolboxes from rodents to non-human primates to overcome some technical limitations of multi-electrode recording technology.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".