Preserved neural dynamics across animals performing similar behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Animals of the same species exhibit similar behaviours that are advantageously adapted to their body and environment. These behaviours are shaped at the species level by selection pressures over evolutionary timescales. Yet, it remains unclear how these common behavioural adaptations emerge from the idiosyncratic neural circuitry of each individual. The overall organization of neural circuits is preserved across individuals 1 because of their common evolutionarily specified developmental programme 2–4 . Such organization at the circuit level may constrain neural activity 5–8 , leading to low-dimensional latent dynamics across the neural population 9–11 . Accordingly, here we suggested that the shared circuit-level constraints within a species would lead to suitably preserved latent dynamics across individuals. We analysed recordings of neural populations from monkey and mouse motor cortex to demonstrate that neural dynamics in individuals from the same species are surprisingly preserved when they perform similar behaviour. Neural population dynamics were also preserved when animals consciously planned future movements without overt behaviour 12 and enabled the decoding of planned and ongoing movement across different individuals. Furthermore, we found that preserved neural dynamics extend beyond cortical regions to the dorsal striatum, an evolutionarily older structure 13,14 . Finally, we used neural network models to demonstrate that behavioural similarity is necessary but not sufficient for this preservation. We posit that these emergent dynamics result from evolutionary constraints on brain development and thus reflect fundamental properties 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".