MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388363106 · doi:10.1016/j.ibneur.2023.08.1412

ANATOMICAL EVIDENCE THAT THE VISUAL CORTEX IS A POTENTIAL MODEL FOR STUDYING THE EFFECTS OF CANNABINOIDS

2023· article· en· W4388363106 on OpenAlexaff
Catarina Micaelo Fernandes, Hamza Haïmeur, Roberta M. Palmour, Jean‐François Bouchard, Maurice Ptito

Bibliographic record

VenueIBRO Neuroscience Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityAssociation for Canadian Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceSynthetic cannabinoidsVisual cortexCognitive psychologyCortex (anatomy)PsychologyComputer scienceMedicineCannabinoidInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The activation of the CB1 receptor in the brain by the phytocannabinoid Δ9-THC produces a broad range of effects. While the focus of research on the endocannabinoid (eCB) system has been largely dictated by the cognitive and neuropsychiatric impairments seen in regular cannabis users, several alterations in sensory processing related to cannabis use have been reported. Because most of human activities are highly relying on vision, visual perceptual deficits are particularly relevant. In this context, it is important to characterize the anatomical distribution of the eCB system in different visual structures.

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)0.001
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIBRO Neuroscience ReportsSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207