Specific inhibition and disinhibition in the higher-order structure of a cortical connectome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurons are thought to act as parts of assemblies with strong internal excitatory connectivity. Conversely, inhibition is often reduced to blanket inhibition with no targeting specificity. We analyzed the structure of excitation and inhibition in the MICrONS $mm^{3}$ dataset, an electron microscopic reconstruction of a piece of cortical tissue. We found that excitation was structured around a feed-forward flow in large non-random neuron motifs with a structure of information flow from a small number of sources to a larger number of potential targets. Inhibitory neurons connected with neurons in specific sequential positions of these motifs, implementing targeted and symmetrical competition between them. None of these trends are detectable in only pairwise connectivity, demonstrating that inhibition is structured by these large motifs. While descriptions of inhibition in cortical circuits range from non-specific blanket-inhibition to targeted, our results describe a form of targeting specificity existing in the higher-order structure of the connectome. These findings have important implications for the role of inhibition in learning and synaptic plasticity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".