Delay-related activity in marmoset prefrontal cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persistent delay-period activity in prefrontal cortex (PFC) has long been regarded as a neural signature of working memory (WM). Electrophysiological investigations in macaque PFC have provided much insight into WM mechanisms; however, a barrier to understanding is the fact that a portion of PFC lies buried within the principal sulcus in this species and is inaccessible for laminar electrophysiology or optical imaging. The relatively lissencephalic cortex of the New World common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus) circumvents such limitations. It remains unknown, however, whether marmoset PFC neurons exhibit persistent activity. Here, we addressed this gap by conducting wireless electrophysiological recordings in PFC of marmosets performing a delayed-match-to-location task on a home cage-based touchscreen system. As in macaques, marmoset PFC neurons exhibited sample-, delay-, and response-related activity that was directionally tuned and linked to correct task performance. Models constructed from population activity consistently and accurately predicted stimulus location throughout the delay period, supporting a framework of delay activity in which mnemonic representations are relatively stable in time. Taken together, our findings support the existence of common neural mechanisms underlying WM performance in PFC of macaques and marmosets and thus validate the marmoset as a suitable model animal for investigating the microcircuitry underlying WM.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".