MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169045410 · doi:10.1111/tops.12536

Connecting Biological Detail With Neural Computation: Application to the Cerebellar Granule–Golgi Microcircuit

2021· article· en· W3169045410 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTopics in Cognitive Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEyeblink conditioningNeurophysiologyComputer scienceNeuroscienceCognitionNeuroanatomyArtificial intelligenceCognitive scienceComputational modelClassical conditioningConditioningPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurophysiology and neuroanatomy constrain the set of possible computations that can be performed in a brain circuit. While detailed data on brain microcircuits is sometimes available, cognitive modelers are seldom in a position to take these constraints into account. One reason for this is the intrinsic complexity of accounting for biological mechanisms when describing cognitive function. In this paper, we present multiple extensions to the neural engineering framework (NEF), which simplify the integration of low-level constraints such as Dale's principle and spatially constrained connectivity into high-level, functional models. We focus on a model of eyeblink conditioning in the cerebellum, and, in particular, on systematically constructing temporal representations in the recurrent granule-Golgi microcircuit. We analyze how biological constraints impact these representations and demonstrate that our overall model is capable of reproducing key properties of eyeblink conditioning. Furthermore, since our techniques facilitate variation of neurophysiological parameters, we gain insights into why certain neurophysiological parameters may be as observed in nature. While eyeblink conditioning is a somewhat primitive form of learning, we argue that the same methods apply for more cognitive models as well. We implemented our extensions to the NEF in an open-source software library named "NengoBio" and hope that this work inspires similar attempts to bridge low-level biological detail and high-level function.

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.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.259 · 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