MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4281726199 · doi:10.1101/2022.05.28.493821

Multi-dimensional structure of <i>C. elegans</i> thermal learning

2022· preprint· en· W4281726199 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmed Roman, Konstantine Palanski, Ilya Nemenman, William S. Ryu

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAspen Center for PhysicsSimons FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PreferenceConstruct (python library)Associative learningBiological systemAssociative propertyComputer scienceThermalArtificial intelligenceBiologyMathematicsPhysicsNeuroscienceStatisticsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative models of associative learning that explain behavior of real animals with high precision have turned out very difficult to construct. We do this in the context of the dynamics of the thermal preference of C. elegans . For this, we quantify C. elegans thermotaxis in response to various conditioning parameters, genetic perturbations, and operant behavior using a fast, high-throughput microfluidic droplet assay. We then model this data comprehensively, within a new, biologically interpretable, multi-modal framework. We discover that the dynamics of thermal preference are described by two independent contributions and require a model with at least four dynamical variables. One pathway positively associates the experienced temperature independently of food and the other negatively associates to the temperature when food is absent.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms→French-language works237,207→