MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411500943 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2025.1597899

The topology of representational geometry

2025· article· en· W4411500943 on OpenAlex
S. R. Brown, Reza Farivar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopological and Geometric Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSimilarity (geometry)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceTopology (electrical circuits)Function (biology)Artificial neural networkTheoretical computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Representational similarity analysis (RSA) is a powerful tool for abstracting and then comparing neural representations across brains, regions, models and modalities. However, typical RSA analyses compares pairs of representational dissimilarities to judge similarity of two neural systems, and we argue that such methods cannot capture the shape of representational spaces. By leveraging tools from computational topology which can probe the shape of high-dimensional data, we augment RSA to be able to detect more subtle yet real differences and similarities of representational structures. This new method could be used in conjunction with regular RSA in order to make distinct, complementary inferences about neural function.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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