MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413700125 · doi:10.1002/advs.202506833

Dynamic Neural Deactivation Bridges Direct and Competitive Inhibition Processes

2025· article· en· W4413700125 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenhong He, Yifan Du, Ziqi Fu, Youcun Zheng, Nils Muhlert, Barbara J. Sahakian

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersManchester Biomedical Research CentreShenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain ScienceShenzhen Fundamental Research ProgramNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsSensory systemNeuroscienceInhibitory postsynaptic potentialNeuroimagingNeural substrateCognitionFeed forwardStimulus modalityPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inhibition is an important concept in cognitive neuroscience. Direct inhibition, characterized by the active suppression of stimuli, and competition-induced inhibition, which involves ignoring irrelevant stimuli by prioritizing relevant ones, have traditionally been considered distinct and studied separately. Although their spatial neural overlap has been highlighted, the temporal dimension-the development of neural activities over time-remains largely unexplored. Using multimodal neuroimaging and behavioral experiments in the auditory and visual domains, in addition to conjunction analyses that capture their neural commonalities, we observed that both inhibition types exhibit a shared deactivation temporal dynamic. It is characterized by a progressive reduction in frontoparietal activation and increased deactivation in sensory regions, a pattern that is positively correlated with improved inhibition performance and whose causal disruption contributes to reduced inhibitory effect. Furthermore, this deactivation-dominant pattern is consistent across different sensory modalities and generalizes to various low-processing demand scenarios, whether actively induced or passively experienced. In addition, functional blurring in information clarity during inhibition is found. Overall, the findings reveal that diverse inhibitory processes for modulating information input converge on a shared neural substrate characterized by dynamic feedforward signal attenuation, thereby bridging previously disconnected domains of inhibition research and offering new perspectives of neural deactivation.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 venueAdvanced ScienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207