MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396829869 · doi:10.1101/2024.05.10.591729

Task-specific topographic maps of neural activity in the primate lateral prefrontal cortex

2024· preprint· en· W4396829869 on OpenAlexaff
Jinkang Derrick Xiang, Megan Roussy, Benjamin Corrigan, Roberto A. Gulli, Rogelio Luna, Maryam H. Mofrad, Lyle Muller, Jörn Diedrichsen, Taylor W. Schmitz, Julio Martínez-Trujillo, Marieke Mur

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrefrontal cortexPrimateNeural activityTask (project management)NeuroscienceSelf-reference effectNonhuman primatePsychologyConsumer neuroscienceCognitive psychologyComputer scienceBiologyEvolutionary biologyCognitionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Neurons in the primate lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) flexibly adapt their activity to support a wide range of cognitive tasks. Whether and how the topography of LPFC neural activity changes as a function of task is unclear. In the present study, we address this issue by characterizing the functional topography of LPFC neural activity in awake behaving macaques performing three distinct cognitive tasks. We recorded from chronically implanted multi-electrode arrays and show that the topography of LPFC activity is stable within a task, but adaptive across tasks. The topography of neural activity exhibits a spatial scale compatible with prior anatomical tracing work on a!erent LPFC inputs. Our findings show that LPFC maps of neural population activity are stable for a specific task, providing robust neural codes that support task specialization. Moreover, the variability in functional topographies across tasks indicates activity landscapes can adapt, providing flexibility to LPFC neural codes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207