MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Laminar Dynamics of Target Selection in the Posterior Parietal Cortex of the Common Marmoset

2024· article· en· W4394856608 on OpenAlexafffund
Janahan Selvanayagam, Kevin Johnston, Stefan Everling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCephalopods and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMarmosetPosterior parietal cortexCortex (anatomy)Laminar flowSelection (genetic algorithm)BiologyNeuroscienceAnatomyEvolutionary biologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsEcologyMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lateral intraparietal area (LIP) plays a crucial role in target selection and attention in primates, but the laminar microcircuitry of this region is largely unknown. To address this, we used ultra-high density laminar electrophysiology with Neuropixels probes to record neural activity in the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) of two adult marmosets while they performed a simple visual target selection task. Our results reveal neural correlates of visual target selection in the marmoset, similar to those observed in macaques and humans, with distinct timing and profiles of activity across cell types and cortical layers. Notably, a greater proportion of neurons exhibited stimulus-related activity in superficial layers whereas a greater proportion of infragranular neurons exhibited significant postsaccadic activity. Stimulus-related activity was first observed in granular layer putative interneurons, whereas target discrimination activity emerged first in supragranular layers putative pyramidal neurons, supporting a canonical laminar circuit underlying visual target selection in marmoset PPC. These findings provide novel insights into the neural basis of visual attention and target selection in primates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicCephalopods and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207