MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410169185 · doi:10.1038/s12276-025-01456-7

Quantitative dynamics of neural uncertainty in sensory processing and decision-making during discriminative learning

2025· article· en· W4410169185 on OpenAlexaff
Jae C. Oh, Sun Kwang Kim, Yong‐Seok Lee, Sang Jeong Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental & Molecular Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaKorea Health Industry Development InstituteNational Research Foundation
KeywordsSensory systemSomatosensory systemComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningRepresentation (politics)Discriminative modelCognitionPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncertainty is crucial in sensory processing, necessitating further quantitative research on its neural representation in the sensory cortex. Here, to address this need, we used a deep learning approach to quantify uncertainties in neural activity from the forelimb area of the primary somatosensory cortex (fS1) during a vibration frequency discrimination task, introducing a transformer model designed to decode neural data not consistently tracked over time. Our model shows that the neural representation of fS1 encodes uncertainties not only from vibratory stimuli but also from decision-making processes, emphasizing its crucial role across various biological contexts. We confirmed that uncertainty decreases as learning progresses and increases with interruptions in learning. In line with predictions from previous studies, we also observed that uncertainty is high at psychometric thresholds. Furthermore, high uncertainty correlates with incorrect decisions, and we have identified dynamics in uncertainty between previous and current trials. Such findings underscore the evolving role of fS1 in assessing uncertainty for the brain's downstream areas as learning progresses.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental & Molecular MedicineSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207