MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214324877 · doi:10.1002/bies.202100148

Degeneracy in the nervous system: from neuronal excitability to neural coding

2021· article· en· W3214324877 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Amin Kamaleddin

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDegeneracy (biology)NeuroscienceNervous systemRobustness (evolution)EvolvabilityComputer scienceNeural codingContext (archaeology)BiologyCoding (social sciences)Neural systemBioinformaticsMathematicsEvolutionary biologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Degeneracy is ubiquitous across biological systems where structurally different elements can yield a similar outcome. Degeneracy is of particular interest in neuroscience too. On the one hand, degeneracy confers robustness to the nervous system and facilitates evolvability: Different elements provide a backup plan for the system in response to any perturbation or disturbance. On the other, a difficulty in the treatment of some neurological disorders such as chronic pain is explained in light of different elements all of which contribute to the pathological behavior of the system. Under these circumstances, targeting a specific element is ineffective because other elements can compensate for this modulation. Understanding degeneracy in the physiological context explains its beneficial role in the robustness of neural circuits. Likewise, understanding degeneracy in the pathological context opens new avenues of discovery to find more effective therapies.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioEssaysSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207