Reciprocal feature encoding by cortical excitatory and inhibitory neurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the cortex, the interplay between excitation and inhibition determines the fidelity of neuronal representations. However, while the receptive fields of excitatory neurons are often fine-tuned to the encoded features, the principles governing the tuning of inhibitory neurons are still elusive. We addressed this problem by recording populations of neurons in the postsubiculum (PoSub), a cortical area where the receptive fields of most excitatory neurons correspond to a specific head-direction (HD). In contrast to PoSub-HD cells, the tuning of fast-spiking (FS) cells, the largest class of cortical inhibitory neurons, was broad and heterogeneous. However, we found that PoSub-FS cell tuning curves were often fine-tuned in the spatial frequency domain, which resulted in various radial symmetries in their HD tuning. In addition, recordings and specific optogenetic manipulations of the upstream thalamic populations as well as computational models suggest that this population co-tuning in the frequency domain has a local origin. Together, these findings provide evidence that the resolution of neuronal tuning is an intrinsic property of local cortical networks, shared by both excitatory and inhibitory cell populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".