Distinct information conveyed to the olfactory bulb by feedforward input from the nose and feedback from the cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sensory systems are organized hierarchically, but feedback projections frequently disrupt this order. In the olfactory bulb (OB), cortical feedback projections numerically match sensory inputs. To unravel information carried by these two streams, we imaged the activity of olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) and cortical axons in the mouse OB using calcium indicators, multiphoton microscopy, and diverse olfactory stimuli. Here, we show that odorant mixtures of increasing complexity evoke progressively denser OSN activity, yet cortical feedback activity is of similar sparsity for all stimuli. Also, representations of complex mixtures are similar in OSNs but are decorrelated in cortical axons. While OSN responses to increasing odorant concentrations exhibit a sigmoidal relationship, cortical axonal responses are complex and nonmonotonic, which can be explained by a model with activity-dependent feedback inhibition in the cortex. Our study indicates that early-stage olfactory circuits have access to local feedforward signals and global, efficiently formatted information about odor scenes through cortical feedback.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".