MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296368831 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-33204-0

Flexible cue anchoring strategies enable stable head direction coding in both sighted and blind animals

2022· article· en· W4296368831 on OpenAlexafffund
Kadjita Asumbisa, Adrien Peyrache, Stuart Trenholm

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsGovernment of CanadaAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsNeuroscienceThalamusSensory systemSensory cueVisual spaceComputer scienceBiologyPsychologyPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vision plays a crucial role in instructing the brain's spatial navigation systems. However, little is known about how vision loss affects the neuronal encoding of spatial information. Here, recording from head direction (HD) cells in the anterior dorsal nucleus of the thalamus in mice, we find stable and robust HD tuning in rd1 mice, a model of photoreceptor degeneration, that go blind by approximately one month of age. In contrast, placing sighted animals in darkness significantly impairs HD cell tuning. We find that blind mice use olfactory cues to maintain stable HD tuning and that prior visual experience leads to refined HD cell tuning in blind rd1 adult mice compared to congenitally blind animals. Finally, in the absence of both visual and olfactory cues, the HD attractor network remains intact but the preferred firing direction of HD cells drifts over time. These findings demonstrate flexibility in how the brain uses diverse sensory information to generate a stable directional representation of space.

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations40
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207