Physiological noise facilitates multiplexed coding of vibrotactile-like signals in somatosensory cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurons can use different aspects of their spiking to simultaneously represent (multiplex) different features of a stimulus. For example, some pyramidal neurons in primary somatosensory cortex (S1) use the rate and timing of their spikes to, respectively, encode the intensity and frequency of vibrotactile stimuli. Doing so has several requirements. Because they fire at low rates, pyramidal neurons cannot entrain 1:1 with high-frequency (100 to 600 Hz) inputs and, instead, must skip (i.e., not respond to) some stimulus cycles. The proportion of skipped cycles must vary inversely with stimulus intensity for firing rate to encode stimulus intensity. Spikes must phase-lock to the stimulus for spike times (intervals) to encode stimulus frequency, but, in addition, skipping must occur irregularly to avoid aliasing. Using simulations and in vitro experiments in which mouse S1 pyramidal neurons were stimulated with inputs emulating those induced by vibrotactile stimuli, we show that fewer cycles are skipped as stimulus intensity increases, as required for rate coding, and that intrinsic or synaptic noise can induce irregular skipping without disrupting phase locking, as required for temporal coding. This occurs because noise can modulate the reliability without disrupting the precision of spikes evoked by small-amplitude, fast-onset signals. Specifically, in the fluctuation-driven regime associated with sparse spiking, rate and temporal coding are both paradoxically improved by the strong synaptic noise characteristic of the intact cortex. Our results demonstrate that multiplexed coding by S1 pyramidal neurons is not only feasible under in vivo conditions, but that background synaptic noise is actually beneficial.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".