Fast burst fraction transients convey information independent of the firing rate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theories of attention and learning have hypothesized a central role for high-frequency bursting in cognitive functions, but experimental reports of burst-mediated representations \emph{in vivo} have been limited. Here we used a novel demultiplexing approach by considering a conjunctive burst code. We studied this code \emph{in vivo} while animals learned to report direct electrical stimulation of the somatosensory cortex and found two acquired yet independent representations. One code, the event rate, showed a sparse and succint stiumulus representation and a small modulation upon detection errors. The other code, the burst fraction, correlated more globally with stimulation and more promptly responded to detection errors. Potent and fast modulations of the burst fraction were seen even in cells that were considered unresponsive based on the firing rate. During the later stages of training, this modulation in bursting happened earlier, gradually aligning temporally with the representation in event rate. The alignment of bursting and event rate modulation sharpened the firing rate response, and was strongly associated with behavioral accuracy. Thus a fine-grained separation of spike timing patterns reveals two signals that accompany stimulus representations: an error signal that can be essential to guide learning and a sharpening signal that could implement attention mechanisms.
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) | 0.001 | 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".