Version history

1 version on record. Newest first; the live version sits at the top with a live indicator.

  1. Live e762b6e40708
    5/17/2026, 4:35:28 PM
    Content snapshot
    {
      "kind": "infographic",
      "prompt": "Timing and qualitative form of mouse V1 prediction-error responses vary across paradigms (sequence vs. oddball) and may distinguish 'omission-error' vs. 'substitution-error' channels — informative for which version of predictive coding best fits the data.",
      "provider": "other",
      "raw_fields": {
        "papers": [
          {
            "n": null,
            "doi": "10.1093/cercor/bhad163",
            "value": "100-150",
            "method": "extracellular recording + MbTDR",
            "metric": "late suppression window (ms)",
            "n_analyzed": null,
            "ci_or_error": null,
            "text_access": "abstract_only",
            "n_definition": "mice (count not in abstract)",
            "scope_region": "V1",
            "study_system": "mouse V1",
            "taxonomic_level": "broad category",
            "scope_population": "all V1 units pooled",
            "value_source_sentence": "Neural responses to expected stimuli were suppressed in a late window (100-150 ms) after stimulus onset following training, whereas responses to novel stimuli were not.",
            "experimental_conditions": "sequence learning, awake"
          },
          {
            "n": null,
            "doi": "10.1093/cercor/bhad215",
            "value": "150-230",
            "method": "16-channel LFP + MUA",
            "metric": "deviance onset latency (ms) in supragranular V1",
            "n_analyzed": null,
            "ci_or_error": null,
            "text_access": "abstract_only",
            "n_definition": "mice (count not in abstract)",
            "scope_region": "V1 L2/3",
            "study_system": "mouse V1",
            "taxonomic_level": "broad category",
            "scope_population": "all V1 units pooled",
            "value_source_sentence": "Multiunit activity and current source density profiles showed that although basic adaptation to redundant stimuli was present early (50 ms) in layer 4 responses, DD emerged later (150-230 ms) in supragranular layers (L2/3).",
            "experimental_conditions": "visual oddball, awake"
          },
          {
            "n": null,
            "doi": "10.1101/2024.01.20.576433",
            "value": "increased at expected stimulus time",
            "method": "two-photon calcium imaging",
            "metric": "omission-evoked activity",
            "n_analyzed": null,
            "ci_or_error": null,
            "text_access": "abstract_only",
            "n_definition": "mice (count not in abstract)",
            "scope_region": "V1 L2/3",
            "study_system": "mouse V1 L2/3",
            "taxonomic_level": "subcategory",
            "scope_population": "L2/3 pyramidal cells",
            "value_source_sentence": "We find increased neural activity at the time an expected, but omitted, stimulus would have occurred but no significant prediction error responses following an unexpected stimulus substitution.",
            "experimental_conditions": "multi-day sequence learning, awake"
          }
        ],
        "audit_issues": [
          {
            "dimension": "study_system",
            "description": "Rows mix paradigms (sequence learning vs. visual oddball vs. multi-day sequence learning with omission probes) and modalities (extracellular + MbTDR vs. LFP+MUA vs. two-photon Ca²⁺).",
            "entries_affected": [
              "10.1093/cercor/bhad163",
              "10.1093/cercor/bhad215",
              "10.1101/2024.01.20.576433"
            ]
          },
          {
            "dimension": "metric_definition",
            "description": "Reported timings reflect different events: 'late suppression window' (100–150 ms, sequence-learning suppression of expected stimuli), 'deviance-onset latency' (150–230 ms, oddball deviant detection), and 'omission-evoked activity' (qualitative). Not all rows share the same time-zero or response definition.",
            "entries_affected": [
              "10.1093/cercor/bhad163",
              "10.1093/cercor/bhad215",
              "10.1101/2024.01.20.576433"
            ]
          },
          {
            "dimension": "scope_population",
            "description": "Row 3 is L2/3 pyramidal cells only; rows 1–2 pool all V1 units.",
            "entries_affected": [
              "10.1101/2024.01.20.576433"
            ]
          }
        ],
        "audit_verdict": "CAVEAT",
        "comparison_id": "mouse_v1_deviant_timing",
        "comparison_name": "Latency of prediction-error / deviance signals in mouse V1",
        "comparison_type": "cross-study conflict",
        "what_it_reveals": "Timing and qualitative form of mouse V1 prediction-error responses vary across paradigms (sequence vs. oddball) and may distinguish 'omission-error' vs. 'substitution-error' channels — informative for which version of predictive coding best fits the data.",
        "homogeneity_check": {
          "caveats": [
            "Different paradigms (sequence learning vs. oddball)",
            "Population definition differs (L2/3-only vs. all units)",
            "Methods range from MUA/LFP to two-photon imaging"
          ],
          "n_definition_uniform": "false",
          "scope_region_uniform": "true",
          "taxonomic_level_uniform": "false",
          "scope_population_uniform": "false"
        },
        "suggested_plot_type": "timeline",
        "mandatory_caption_caveats": [
          "Paradigms differ (sequence-learning suppression vs. oddball deviance vs. omission probes); the reported timings are not all measured from the same stimulus event.",
          "Population definition differs (all V1 units vs. L2/3-only)."
        ]
      },
      "section_id": "section_14",
      "source_url": "https://github.com/AllenNeuralDynamics/ComputationalReviewRecurrence/blob/79ce062d54a924ce05953ec90aa9d26044d2b48f/evidence/section_14_evidence_package.json",
      "target_ref": "wiki_page:computationalreviewrecurrence-14-predictive-coding",
      "review_repo": "ComputationalReviewRecurrence",
      "section_ref": "wiki_page:computationalreviewrecurrence-14-predictive-coding",
      "source_path": "evidence/section_14_evidence_package.json",
      "source_refs": [
        "paper:paper-805e7b60808f",
        "paper:paper-c0f0ae0b432b",
        "paper:paper-d6acd7459360"
      ],
      "section_title": "14. Predictive-coding and dynamical-systems accounts — the role of recurrent excitatory feedback in error signalling, state estimation, and reservoir computing, evaluated against mouse data",
      "source_policy": {
        "mode": "public_source_pointer_with_short_context",
        "notes": [
          "Local review repositories are read-only inputs.",
          "SciDEX stores paper metadata, structured evidence, file pointers, and short citation contexts; it does not copy full review prose."
        ],
        "source_commit_sha": "79ce062d54a924ce05953ec90aa9d26044d2b48f",
        "source_repository_url": "https://github.com/AllenNeuralDynamics/ComputationalReviewRecurrence"
      },
      "generation_status": "complete",
      "review_bundle_ref": "analysis_bundle:ab-d9c479db9be9",
      "origin_url": "https://github.com/AllenNeuralDynamics/ComputationalReviewRecurrence/blob/79ce062d54a924ce05953ec90aa9d26044d2b48f/evidence/section_14_evidence_package.json",
      "commit_sha": "79ce062d54a924ce05953ec90aa9d26044d2b48f",
      "created_by": "persona-jerome-lecoq-gbo-neuroscience",
      "repository_url": "https://github.com/AllenNeuralDynamics/ComputationalReviewRecurrence"
    }