MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405573933 · doi:10.1038/s42003-024-07349-1

Flexibility of intrinsic neural timescales during distinct behavioral states

2024· article· en· W4405573933 on OpenAlexafffund
Yasir Çatal, Kaan Keskin, Angelika Wolman, Philipp Klar, David Smith, Georg Northoff

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean Commission
KeywordsRest (music)NeuroimagingPsychologyNeuroscienceElectroencephalographyNeural activityTask (project management)Brain activity and meditationStimulus (psychology)Cognitive psychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent neuroimaging studies demonstrate a heterogeneity of timescales prevalent in the brain's ongoing spontaneous activity, labeled intrinsic neural timescales (INT). At the same time, neural timescales also reflect stimulus- or task-related activity. The relationship of the INT during the brain's spontaneous activity with their involvement in task states including behavior remains unclear. To address this question, we combined calcium imaging data of spontaneously behaving mice and human electroencephalography (EEG) during rest and task states with computational modeling. We obtained four primary findings: (i) the distinct behavioral states can be accurately predicted from INT, (ii) INT become longer during behavioral states compared to rest, (iii) INT change from rest to task is correlated negatively with the variability of INT during rest, (iv) neural mass modeling shows a key role of recurrent connections in mediating the rest-task change of INT. Extending current findings, our results show the dynamic nature of the brain's INT in reflecting continuous behavior through their flexible rest-task modulation possibly mediated by recurrent connections.

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 score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207