MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007400989 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2020.00079

Neural Synchrony Gives Rise to Amplitude- and Duration-Invariant Encoding Consistent With Perception of Natural Communication Stimuli

2020· article· en· W3007400989 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael G. Metzen, Volker Hofmann, Maurice J. Chacron

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsNeural codingStimulus (psychology)NeuroscienceElectric fishSensory systemPerceptionPopulationPsychologyInvariant (physics)CommunicationBiologyPhysicsCognitive psychologyFish <Actinopterygii>Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When confronted with a highly variable environment, it remains poorly understood how neural populations encode and classify natural stimuli to give rise to appropriate and consistent behavioral responses. Here we investigated population coding of natural communication signals with different attributes (i.e., amplitude and duration) in the electrosensory system of the weakly electric fish Apteronotus leptorhynchus. Our results show that, while single peripheral neurons encode the detailed timecourse of different stimulus waveforms, measures of population synchrony are effectively unchanged because of coordinated increases and decreases in activity. A phenomenological mathematical model reproduced this invariance and shows that this can be explained by considering homogeneous populations whose responses are solely determined by single neuron firing properties. Moreover, recordings from downstream central neurons reveal that synchronous afferent activity is actually decoded and thus most likely transmitted to higher brain areas. Finally, we demonstrate that the associated behavioral responses at the organism level are invariant. Our results provide a mechanism by which amplitude- and duration-invariant coding of behaviorally relevant sensory input emerges across successive brain areas thereby presumably giving rise to invariant behavioral responses. Such mechanisms are likely to be found in other systems that share anatomical and functional features with the electrosensory system (e.g., auditory, visual, vestibular).

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207