MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396738069 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-58524-7

The impact of spike timing precision and spike emission reliability on decoding accuracy

2024· article· en· W4396738069 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpike (software development)Reliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceDecoding methodsAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precisely timed and reliably emitted spikes are hypothesized to serve multiple functions, including improving the accuracy and reproducibility of encoding stimuli, memories, or behaviours across trials. When these spikes occur as a repeating sequence, they can be used to encode and decode a potential time series. Here, we show both analytically and in simulations that the error incurred in approximating a time series with precisely timed and reliably emitted spikes decreases linearly with the number of neurons or spikes used in the decoding. This was verified numerically with synthetically generated patterns of spikes. Further, we found that if spikes were imprecise in their timing, or unreliable in their emission, the error incurred in decoding with these spikes would be sub-linear. However, if the spike precision or spike reliability increased with network size, the error incurred in decoding a time-series with sequences of spikes would maintain a linear decrease with network size. The spike precision had to increase linearly with network size, while the probability of spike failure had to decrease with the square-root of the network size. Finally, we identified a candidate circuit to test this scaling relationship: the repeating sequences of spikes with sub-millisecond precision in area HVC (proper name) of the zebra finch. This scaling relationship can be tested using both neural data and song-spectrogram-based recordings while taking advantage of the natural fluctuation in HVC network size due to neurogenesis.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.324 · 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