MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297341762 · doi:10.1101/2022.09.26.509498

Preserved neural population dynamics across animals performing similar behaviour

2022· preprint· en· W4297341762 on OpenAlexaff
Mostafa Safaie, Joanna Chang, Junchol Park, Lee E. Miller, Joshua T. Dudman, Matthew G. Perich, Juan Álvaro Gallego

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamics (music)PopulationNeuroscienceBiologySelection (genetic algorithm)Neural decodingNeural activityPsychologyCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Animals of the same species often exhibit similar behaviours that are advantageously adapted to their body and their environment. These behaviours are shaped by selection pressures over evolutionary timescales at the species level, yet each individual produces these behaviours using a different, uniquely constructed brain. It remains unclear how these common behavioural adaptations emerge from the idiosyncratic neural circuitry of a given individual. Here, we hypothesised that the adaptive behaviour of a species requires specific neural population ‘latent dynamics’. These latent dynamics should thus be preserved and identifiable across individuals within a species, regardless of the idiosyncratic aspects of each individual’s brain. Using recordings of neural populations from monkey and mouse motor cortex, we show that individuals from the same species share surprisingly similar neural dynamics when they perform the same behaviour. The similarity in neural population dynamics extends beyond cortical regions to the dorsal striatum, an evolutionarily older structure, and also holds when animals con-sciously plan future movements without overt behaviour. These preserved dynamics are behaviourally-relevant, allowing decoding of intended and ongoing movements across individuals. We posit that these emergent neural population dynamics result from evolutionarily-imposed constraints on brain development, and reflect a fundamental property of the neural basis of behaviour.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207