ArticleNeuroinformatics2026
Range-Limited Scale Stability of Dynamic Direction Representations in a Connectome-Constrained Fly Visual Model.
Article in Neuroinformatics, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We test whether motion direction in a frozen, independently pretrained FLYVIS checkpoint remains linearly accessible when retinal apparent scale is held out. The downstream decoder is supervised on direction labels from the other scales, so the experiment measures transfer of an existing representation rather than autonomous six-way classification by FLYVIS. The analysis unit is a unique rendered condition; moving bars and translating targets form the 192-condition scale-varying set, while geometrically scale-neutral moving edges provide a direction control. Across eight scales, the frozen representation gives leave-one-scale-out accuracy 0.885 (Wilson 95% interval 0.833-0.923). Transfer is nearly perfect across the six interior held-out scales (0.986) but reaches chance at the upper boundary [Formula: see text] (0.167), revealing strong but range-limited scale stability. Capacity and sampling-matched direction-trained temporal models reach 0.983-0.986 with hexagonal, collision-free square-projected, or self-only neighbourhood operators. This establishes raw task solvability and shows that sampling geometry alone does not explain success; unlike FLYVIS, these controls are optimized directly for direction labels. Direct interventions further show that T4/T5 activity contributes to preservation of the intact linear code: after T4/T5 silencing, a refitted decoder retains 0.891 accuracy while the fixed intact decoder falls to 0.193, indicating distributed information in reorganized coordinates. Learned-parameter shuffles reveal realization-dependent code disruption and dynamical fragility. Together, the results establish a reusable cross-scale benchmark, strong interior-scale transfer in a frozen connectome-constrained model, a sharp extrapolation boundary, and specific perturbational sensitivities. Optical-flow pretraining, connectome-constrained dynamics, and learned parameters define complementary mechanistic factors for controlled factorial study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42627449What 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.