standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
| transfer | transfers | a method or concept carried in from another field |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; 1 of 2 relations here carries that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| claim_type | mechanism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | feature-selective auditory attention Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | electrophysiology Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: electrophysiology | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[2] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[3] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The analysis uses only firing rate, not spike timing. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Because many bandwidth targets were also amplitude-modulated, phase locking could signal a target in both attention conditions, so the task may not have been demanding enough to reveal attentional effects on spike timing. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Neurons were pooled across sessions and trials resampled, so real correlated and intrinsic variability had to be reintroduced by modelling rather than measured simultaneously. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The task may be too easy to force attention-related changes in A1 temporal dynamics. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The two levels of analysis disagree on the same data: attention does not enhance the single-neuron representation, while the population analysis shows enhanced encoding. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: a single-neuron measurement used to decide whether attention enhances sensory encoding: in these data it does not, while the population-level analysis of the same recordings shows that it does | limitations[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | The physical stimulus differs between animals, because the values were tailored to each subject's own psychophysical thresholds rather than fixed. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: pooling or comparing the two subjects at 'the same' stimulus level: the AM and ∆BW values were tailored per subject to that subject's own psychophysical thresholds | limitations[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | The condition labels are defined by a sensitivity criterion, not by a physical quantity: 'near threshold' means the level at which d-prime equals 1. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the near/above-threshold conditions as physical stimulus levels: they are defined by the subject's measured sensitivity, at d-prime = 1, ~1.2 and >1.5 | limitations[6] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | An inclusion decision was made and checked, and the check is reported rather than the criterion being justified in advance. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the unit count in this study: 58 single units held for only two blocks are included, and the authors report that removing them does not qualitatively change the results | limitations[7] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| transfers | per-subject psychophysical detection thresholds measured beforehand and used to set the stimulus values for single-unit recording, so neural responses are read against each animal's own perceptual scale Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[0] | 0.8 | the tagger's words |
| controls | the AM frequency presented on each trial chosen AT RANDOM rather than adaptively Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: SAMPLING BIAS TOWARDS THE CELLS THE EXPERIMENT IS ABOUT - searching for a frequency that drives the neuron finds AM-sensitive cells and quietly leaves the bandwidth-sensitive ones out of the population being described · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | population code Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: population code | concepts[0] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | single-neuron representation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: single-neuron representation | concepts[1] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | psychophysical threshold Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: psychophysical threshold | concepts[2] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | conditions Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: conditions | concepts[3] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | variables Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: variables | concepts[4] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| senses | sensory representation - AT THE SINGLE-NEURON LEVEL: not enhanced by attention in these data, which is the paper's own negative result Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | sensory representation - AT THE POPULATION LEVEL: enhanced, tracking behaviour, and described as an emergent code NOT MEASURABLE at the single-neuron level Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | psychophysical threshold - defined as the modulation level at which the subject's measured d-prime equals 1, so the condition is fixed by sensitivity rather than by the stimulus Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | `conditions` / `variables` - THE TWO MOST GENERIC WORDS IN EXPERIMENTAL SCIENCE, BOTH STIPULATED LOCALLY AND IN ONE BREATH. `in the present study we refer to “conditions” as distinct combinations of AM, ∆BW and context ... We refer to “variables” as the three dimensions along which all conditions vary.` Neither word is being used oddly - both are being pinned, because the analysis needs 26 of one and 3 of the other and the ordinary senses would collapse them. `in the present study` is the paper marking the scope of its own stipulation, which is exactly the marker a cross-paper corpus needs and almost never gets. A tag joining this record's `variables` to another paper's `variables` would join 3 dimensions to a table of measurements. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | contradicts → Niwa et al. (2012b), Schwartz and David (2017) and von Trapp et al. (2016), which reported attention-related changes in A1 single-neuron tuning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Mante et al. (2013) and Rigotti et al. (2013) population-level analyses of prefrontal cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | single-neuron representation —contrasted-with→ population code Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 also in: single-neuron representation · population code | concept_edges[0] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | variables —distinct-from→ conditions Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 1 · note: The paper separates them by construction - conditions are combinations, variables are the axes those combinations range over, 26 against 3. Cue: 'distinct' appears in the conditions clause and the whole span is one stipulation. · the relation stated: We refer to “variables” as the three dimensions along which all conditions vary also in: variables · conditions | concept_edges[1] | 0.9 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | logistic regression Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: logistic regression | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | multiple linear regression Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: multiple linear regression | content_tags.statistics[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Wilcoxon signed rank test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Wilcoxon signed rank test | content_tags.statistics[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ROC / signal detection analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ROC / signal detection analysis | content_tags.statistics[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | bootstrap Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: bootstrap | content_tags.statistics[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Spearman correlation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Spearman correlation | content_tags.statistics[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | t-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: t-test | content_tags.statistics[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | support vector machine with held-out test set Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Fano factor (variance-to-mean ratio) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Fano factor (variance-to-mean ratio) | content_tags.statistics[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | principal component analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: principal component analysis | content_tags.statistics[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | z-score standardisation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: z-score standardisation | content_tags.statistics[10] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | linear regression Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: linear regression | content_tags.statistics[11] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Individual A1 neurons carried mixed selectivity, encoding both the spectral and temporal sound features and the attention condition. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Attention produced no average enhancement of feature encoding in single A1 neurons. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Neurons were as likely to increase as to decrease their AM ROC area across attention conditions (p = 0.74). Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Context had a significant main effect in more neurons than either acoustic feature. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | After targeted dimensionality reduction, the population code decoded each sound feature better when that feature was attended. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The attentional advantage in the population code was large and highly reliable across simulated populations. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The observed attentional modulation exceeded that of every surrogate population in which higher-order correlations had been destroyed. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | AM-axis population projections were significantly related to task performance (mean choice probability 0.573). Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Both monkeys weighted the attended feature more heavily than the unattended one in their yes/no reports. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Attention did not alter spike timing: phase locking to the temporal envelope was unaffected by the attention condition. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[10] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Population trajectories began with an early non-selective course in which each stimulus projected to about the same region of the subspace. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[11] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | targeted dimensionality reduction (TDR) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | de-mixing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: de-mixing | content_tags.definitions[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | feature-specific gain (FSG) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: feature-specific gain (FSG) | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ROC area Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ROC area | content_tags.definitions[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | choice probability (CP) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: choice probability (CP) | content_tags.definitions[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | surrogate population Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: surrogate population | content_tags.definitions[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | task context Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: task context | content_tags.variables[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | AM depth Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: AM depth | content_tags.variables[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | spectral bandwidth Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: spectral bandwidth | content_tags.variables[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | trial-by-trial spike count Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: trial-by-trial spike count | content_tags.variables[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | behavioral report Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: behavioral report | content_tags.variables[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | AM frequency Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: AM frequency | content_tags.variables[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | noise correlations Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: noise correlations | content_tags.variables[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | neuron-intrinsic variability Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: neuron-intrinsic variability | content_tags.variables[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 92 — single A1 neurons recorded, from two rhesus macaques Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 0.151 — average increase in population ROC area for AM when AM was the attended feature Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | p = 0.73 and 0.74 — sign rank p-values showing no attentional change in single-neuron BW and AM sensitivity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 0.633 (p=1.12e-61) — mean choice probability for projections into the full three-dimensional task-variable subspace Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 1000 — surrogate populations built with intact single-neuron tuning but destroyed higher-order correlations Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 26 (13 x 2) — total experimental conditions, being 13 sound combinations crossed with two attention blocks Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 47 total sessions, p = 8.98e-8 — behavioural sessions and the sign rank p-value showing attention shifted the animals' feature weighting Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | n = 434 pairs — simultaneously recorded neuron pairs used to estimate the noise correlations imposed on simulated populations Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 65 dB SPL — calibrated presentation level of every sound stimulus at the outer ear Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 400 ms — duration of each of the two sounds in a trial Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[9] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.