MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164738374 · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-90413-1

Synergistic population coding of natural communication stimuli by hindbrain electrosensory neurons

2021· article· en· W3164738374 on OpenAlexafffund
Ziqi Wang, Maurice J. Chacron

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHindbrainStimulus (psychology)Neural codingPopulationNeuroscienceCoding (social sciences)Electric fishPerceptionENCODEComputer scienceBiologyPsychologyFish <Actinopterygii>MathematicsGeneCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding how neural populations encode natural stimuli with complex spatiotemporal structure to give rise to perception remains a central problem in neuroscience. Here we investigated population coding of natural communication stimuli by hindbrain neurons within the electrosensory system of weakly electric fish Apteronotus leptorhynchus. Overall, we found that simultaneously recorded neural activities were correlated: signal but not noise correlations were variable depending on the stimulus waveform as well as the distance between neurons. Combining the neural activities using an equal-weight sum gave rise to discrimination performance between different stimulus waveforms that was limited by redundancy introduced by noise correlations. However, using an evolutionary algorithm to assign different weights to individual neurons before combining their activities (i.e., a weighted sum) gave rise to increased discrimination performance by revealing synergistic interactions between neural activities. Our results thus demonstrate that correlations between the neural activities of hindbrain electrosensory neurons can enhance information about the structure of natural communication stimuli that allow for reliable discrimination between different waveforms by downstream brain areas.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207