MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197151503 · doi:10.1167/jov.21.9.2415

Spontaneous traveling waves are an intrinsic feature of ongoing cortical dynamics and regulate perceptual sensitivity

2021· article· en· W3197151503 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary W. Davis, Gabriel Benigno, Terrence J. Sejnowski, John H. Reynolds, Lyle Muller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionSensitivity (control systems)Dynamics (music)Traveling waveFeature (linguistics)PsychologyNeuroscienceCommunicationPhysicsAcousticsMathematicsPhilosophyMathematical analysisEngineeringLinguisticsElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychophysics has long focused on measuring the stimulus intensity that reaches the threshold for conscious report. However, variability in the neural activity evoked by the stimulus results in variable perceptual sensitivity for the same level of stimulus intensity. These variable fluctuations in neural activity have therefore been regarded as a source of noise, impairing the threshold for conscious perception estimated from signal detection theory. Recently we have found that variable fluctuations in cortical responses are due, in part, to the state of traveling waves of spontaneous cortical activity (Davis et al., Nature, 2020). These waves modulate stimulus-evoked spiking activity and perceptual sensitivity in marmosets trained to detect faint visual targets. Thus, in contrast to the traditional view of fluctuations as harmful noise, traveling waves improve perceptual thresholds. To gain insight into the mechanisms underlying traveling waves, we study a large-scale spiking network model with conductance-based synapses, biologically realistic topographic connectivity, and action potential propagation speeds consistent with those observed in unmyelinated horizontal fibers. We found that these properties were sufficient to generate spontaneous waves across the entire range of network parameters that produced asynchronous-irregular spiking dynamics (Brunel, J Comput Neurosci, 2000; Renart et al., Science, 2010). Further, we found that neuronal participation in these waves was sparse, enabling traveling waves to coexist with asynchronous-irregular spiking activity without necessarily inducing correlations, which have been found to impair perception (Nandy et al., eLife, 2019). This sparse-wave network regime remained sensitive to feed-forward input and modulated the strength of stimulus-evoked responses as observed in the cortex. This was in contrast to networks that produced dense spiking waves, which drove strong correlations and rendered the network insensitive to feed-forward input. Traveling waves appear to be an intrinsic feature of cortical dynamics, and they therefore likely impact the moment-to-moment processing of information throughout the brain.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207