MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402511305 · doi:10.1101/2024.09.09.611671

Burst firing optimizes invariant coding of natural communication signals by electrosensory neural populations

2024· preprint· en· W4402511305 on OpenAlexaff
Michael G. Metzen, Amin Akhshi, Pouya Bashivan, Anmar Khadra, Maurice J. Chacron

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoding (social sciences)Invariant (physics)Neural codingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate perception of objects within the environment independent of context is essential for an organism’s survival. While neurons that respond in an invariant manner to identity-preserving transformations of objects are thought to provide a neural correlate of context-independent perception, how these emerge in the brain remains poorly understood. Here we demonstrate that burst firing in neural populations can give rise to an invariant representation of highly heterogeneous natural communication stimuli. Multi-unit recordings from central sensory neural populations showed that considering burst spike trains led to invariant representations at the population but not the single neuron level. Computational modeling further revealed that optimal invariance is achieved for levels of burst firing seen experimentally. Taken together, our results demonstrate a novel function for burst firing towards establishing invariant representations of sensory input in neural populations.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207