ArticleRoyal Society open science2015
A model for non-monotonic intensity coding.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- What, if anything, can be considered an amodal sensory dimension?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Review
- Predictive olfactory learning in Drosophila.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Odorant mixtures elicit less variable and faster responses than pure odorants.PLoS computational biology · 2018Article
- Synapsin is required to "boost" memory strength for highly salient events.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peripheral neurons of most sensory systems increase their response with increasing stimulus intensity. Behavioural responses, however, can be specific to some intermediate intensity level whose particular value might be innate or associatively learned. Learning such a preference requires an adjustable trans- formation from a monotonic stimulus representation at the sensory periphery to a non-monotonic representation for the motor command. How do neural systems accomplish this task? We tackle this general question focusing on odour-intensity learning in the fruit fly, whose first- and second-order olfactory neurons show monotonic stimulus-response curves. Nevertheless, flies form associative memories specific to particular trained odour intensities. Thus, downstream of the first two olfactory processing layers, odour intensity must be re-coded to enable intensity-specific associative learning. We present a minimal, feed-forward, three-layer circuit, which implements the required transformation by combining excitation, inhibition, and, as a decisive third element, homeostatic plasticity. Key features of this circuit motif are consistent with the known architecture and physiology of the fly olfactory system, whereas alternative mechanisms are either not composed of simple, scalable building blocks or not compatible with physiological observations. The simplicity of the circuit and the robustness of its function under parameter changes make this computational motif an attractive candidate for tuneable non-monotonic intensity coding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.