The predictive power of intrinsic timescale during the perceptual decision-making process across the mouse brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Across the cortical hierarchy, single neurons are characterized by differences in the extent to which they can sustain their firing rate over time (i.e., their “intrinsic timescale”). Previous studies have demonstrated that neurons in a given brain region mostly exhibit either short or long intrinsic timescales. In this study, we sought to identify populations of neurons that accumulate information over different timescales in the mouse brain and to characterize their functions in the context of a visual discrimination task. Thus, we separately examined the neural population dynamics of neurons with long or short intrinsic timescales across different brain regions. More specifically, we looked at the decoding performance of these neural populations aligned to different task variables (stimulus onset, movement). Taken together, our population-level findings support the hypothesis that long intrinsic timescale neurons encode abstract variables related to decision formation. Furthermore, we investigated whether there was a relationship between how well a single neuron represents the animal’s choice or stimuli and their intrinsic timescale. We did not observe any significant relationship between the decoding of these task variables and a single neuron’s intrinsic timescale. In summary, our findings support the idea that the long intrinsic timescale population of neurons, which appear at different levels of the cortical hierarchy, are primarily more involved in representing the decision variable.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".