MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098986702

1 Supplemental Data: Brief motion stimuli preferentially activate surround-suppressed neurons in macaque visual area MT

2015· article· en· W7098986702 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban and spatial planning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMacaqueElectrophysiologyReceptive fieldPrimateFixation (population genetics)Fixation pointVisual field
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrophysiological recordings. Two rhesus macaque monkeys took part in the experiments. Both underwent a sterile surgical procedure to implant a headpost and recording cylinder, and following recovery were seated comfortably in a primate chair (Crist Instruments) and trained to fixate a small red spot on a computer monitor in return for a liquid reward. Eye position was monitored at 200 Hz with an infrared camera (SR Research), and required to be within 2º of the fixation point in order for the reward to be dispensed. All aspects of the experiments were approved by the Animal Care Committee of the Montreal Neurological Institute, and were in compliance with regulations established by the Canadian Council on Animal Care We recorded from well-isolated single neurons in area MT. Single waveforms were sorted online and then re-sorted offline, using spike-sorting software (Plexon, Inc). Area MT was identified based on anatomical MRI scans, the prevalence of direction-selective neurons, and on the correlation between receptive field size and eccentricity. We recorded from neurons with receptive fields centered at a mean eccentricity of 12.1o (s.d. 4.1º). The eccentricities for the surround-suppressed neurons were 11.7o (s.d. 4.5º), while those for the non-suppressed neurons were 12.4o (s.d. 3.8º). This difference was not significant (t-test, p = 0.6).

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2620.032

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban and spatial planningFrench-language works237,207