MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312085034 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111860

The mouse claustrum synaptically connects cortical network motifs

2022· article· en· W4312085034 on OpenAlexaff
Houman Qadir, Brent W. Stewart, Jonathan W. VanRyzin, Qiong Wu, Shuo Chen, David A. Seminowicz, Brian N. Mathur

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
KeywordsClaustrumNeuroscienceSensory systemCerebral cortexCortex (anatomy)Nerve netNucleusSensory processingBiologyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingBrain mapping

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatially distant areas of the cerebral cortex coordinate their activity into networks that are integral to cognitive processing. A common structural motif of cortical networks is co-activation of frontal and posterior cortical regions. The neural circuit mechanisms underlying such widespread inter-areal cortical coordination are unclear. Using a discovery based functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) approach in mouse, we observe frontal and posterior cortical regions that demonstrate significant functional connectivity with the subcortical nucleus, the claustrum. Examining whether the claustrum synaptically supports such frontoposterior cortical network architecture, we observe cortico-claustro-cortical circuits reflecting the fMRI data: significant trans-claustral synaptic connectivity from frontal cortices to posteriorly lying sensory and sensory association cortices contralaterally. These data reveal discrete cortical pathways through the claustrum that are positioned to support cortical network motifs central to cognitive control functions and add to the canon of major extended cortico-subcortico-cortical systems in the mammalian brain.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.210 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations42
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207