ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Regularizing hyperparameters of interacting neural signals in the mouse cortex reflect states of arousal.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In natural behaviors, multiple neural signals simultaneously drive activation across overlapping brain networks. Due to limitations in the amount of data that can be acquired in common experimental designs, the determination of these interactions is commonly inferred via modeling approaches, which reduce overfitting by finding appropriate regularizing hyperparameters. However, it is unclear whether these hyperparameters can also be related to any aspect of the underlying biological phenomena and help interpret them. We applied a state-of-the-art regularization procedure-automatic locality determination-to interacting neural activations in the mouse posterior cortex associated with movements of the body and eyes. As expected, regularization significantly improved the determination and interpretability of the response interactions. However, regularizing hyperparameters also changed considerably, and seemingly unpredictably, from animal to animal. We found that these variations were not random; rather, they correlated with the variability in visually evoked responses and with the variability in the state of arousal of the animals measured by pupillometry-both pieces of information that were not included in the modeling framework. These observations could be generalized to another commonly used-but potentially less informative-regularization method, ridge regression. Our findings demonstrate that optimal model hyperparameters can be discovery tools that are informative of factors not a priori included in the model's design.
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.