MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400578985 · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0450-23.2024

Detection of Memory Engrams in Mammalian Neuronal Circuits

2024· article· en· W4400578985 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicole E. Niewinski, Deyanell Hernandez, Michael A. Colicos

Bibliographic record

VenueeNeuro · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceBiological neural networkPremovement neuronal activityNeuronHippocampal formationStimulationNerve netEngramElectrophysiologyNeuronal circuitsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has long been assumed that activity patterns persist in neuronal circuits after they are first experienced, as part of the process of information processing and storage by the brain. However, these "reverberations" of current activity have not been directly observed on a single-neuron level in a mammalian system. Here we demonstrate that specific induced activity patterns are retained in mature cultured hippocampal neuronal networks. Neurons within the network are induced to fire at a single frequency or in a more complex pattern containing two distinct frequencies. After the stimulation was stopped, the subsequent neuronal activity of hundreds of neurons in the network was monitored. In the case of single-frequency stimulation, it was observed that many of the neurons continue to fire at the same frequency that they were stimulated to fire at. Using a recurrent neural network trained to detect specific, more complex patterns, we found that the multiple-frequency stimulation patterns were also retained within the neuronal network. Moreover, it appears that the component frequencies of the more complex patterns are stored in different populations of neurons and neuron subtypes.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeNeuroSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207