MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283770692 · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2022.06.015

A corollary discharge mediates saccade-related inhibition of single units in mnemonic structures of the human brain

2022· article· en· W4283770692 on OpenAlexaff
Chaim N. Katz, Andrea Gómez Palacio Schjetnan, Kramay Patel, Victoria Barkley, Kari L. Hoffman, Suneil K. Kalia, Katherine Duncan, Taufik A. Valiante

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteToronto Western HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSaccadeNeuroscienceCorollaryBiologyInhibitory postsynaptic potentialPremovement neuronal activityPopulationMnemonicTemporal lobePsychologyEye movementCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the critical link between visual exploration and memory, little is known about how neuronal activity in the human mesial temporal lobe (MTL) is modulated by saccades. Here, we characterize saccade-associated neuronal modulations, unit-by-unit, and contrast them to image onset and to occipital lobe neurons. We reveal evidence for a corollary discharge (CD)-like modulatory signal that accompanies saccades, inhibiting/exciting a unique population of broad-/narrow-spiking units, respectively, before and during saccades and with directional selectivity. These findings comport well with the timing, directional nature, and inhibitory circuit implementation of a CD. Additionally, by linking neuronal activity to event-related potentials (ERPs), which are directionally modulated following saccades, we recontextualize the ERP associated with saccades as a proxy for both the strength of inhibition and saccade direction, providing a mechanistic underpinning for the more commonly recorded saccade-related ERP in the human 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 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent BiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207