MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207115136 · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-26175-1

Spontaneous traveling waves naturally emerge from horizontal fiber time delays and travel through locally asynchronous-irregular states

2021· article· en· W3207115136 on OpenAlexafffund
Zachary W. Davis, Gabriel Benigno, Charlee Fletterman, Theo Desbordes, Christopher Steward, Terrence J. Sejnowski, John H. Reynolds, Lyle Muller

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Eye InstituteNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Science FoundationU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesNational Institutes of HealthCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsTraveling waveAsynchronous communicationPhysicsStimulus (psychology)NeuroscienceStatistical physicsComputer scienceMathematicsBiologyMathematical analysisTelecommunicationsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies of sensory-evoked neuronal responses often focus on mean spike rates, with fluctuations treated as internally-generated noise. However, fluctuations of spontaneous activity, often organized as traveling waves, shape stimulus-evoked responses and perceptual sensitivity. The mechanisms underlying these waves are unknown. Further, it is unclear whether waves are consistent with the low rate and weakly correlated "asynchronous-irregular" dynamics observed in cortical recordings. Here, we describe a large-scale computational model with topographically-organized connectivity and conduction delays relevant to biological scales. We find that spontaneous traveling waves are a general property of these networks. The traveling waves that occur in the model are sparse, with only a small fraction of neurons participating in any individual wave. Consequently, they do not induce measurable spike correlations and remain consistent with locally asynchronous irregular states. Further, by modulating local network state, they can shape responses to incoming inputs as observed in vivo.

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)0.000
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 score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations76
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207