MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415714786 · doi:10.1101/2025.10.28.685235

A brain-wide, trial- and time-dependent deterministic drive synergizes with within-trial noise to time self-initiated actions

2025· preprint· en· W4415714786 on OpenAlexaff
Michaël Elbaz, Kole Butterer, Andrew Miri

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsScience North
FundersNorthwestern UniversityNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAction (physics)Noise (video)Control theory (sociology)Value (mathematics)Deterministic system (philosophy)Voluntary action

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deciding when to act in the absence of external cues is essential for exploration, learning, and survival. Yet the neural mechanisms underlying such decisions remain controversial, with current views favoring either deterministic or stochastic underpinnings. We simultaneously recorded from large neuronal populations in cortical, thalamic, pallidal, and cerebellar regions as mice self-initiated voluntary actions. Action onset timing was predictable from firing patterns up to several seconds in advance with predictions correlated across regions, demonstrating a prominent deterministic drive that spans regions. Computational modeling indicated that this drive has an initial value and rate that vary trial-by-trial, and the rate increases within trials. Although the deterministic drive is sufficient to trigger action, noise within trials also contributes to setting action timing. Therefore, discrete (across-trial) and continuous (within-trial) sources of variability synergize to time self-initiated actions. This synergy is observed brain-wide, suggesting a distributed decision-making process rather than a hierarchical, modular one.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeuroscience and Music Perception→French-language works237,207→