跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2610.29205 · v2

Reconstruction differences rival individual differences in the fly compass connectome and break trained circuit models

首次提交 2026-10-21 12:51
版本更新 2026-10-26 09:03
雷达观测 2026-10-29 00:36
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Neural network models are increasingly constructed from synapse-resolution connectomes, and the same circuit is now available in reconstructions from other animals and pipelines. We do not know whether such models are dependent on the reconstruction they are built from, and whether connectome differences are biological or measurement errors. We studied the Drosophila head-direction circuit in nine versions: four flies (male CNS, hemibrain, FlyWire, BANC) and five variants of the same fly varying only by thresholds, proofreading or synapse detection. Using wiring-based correspondences validated by anatomical labels, we place all differences on one scale. A change of synapse detection within one fly changed the circuit more than halfway to the smallest between-fly difference on four distance measures; proofreading differences were smaller but depended on the metric, and left and right halves of one fly differed no more than random halves. Networks trained on each wiring to hold a cued heading developed near-perfect ring attractors, but their error increased from below 1 degree to 10-28 degrees when all weights changed by 1%. Training on each wiring did not transfer to any other connectome, including other versions of the same fly; refitting thirty cell-type gains, we repaired filtering-level differences but remaining error depended on wiring distance. Training with noise lowered precision and gave only partial transfer. In imaging data, the fly compass drifted gradually in darkness. Connectome-constrained models should report the reconstruction they were built on and be tested for robustness across reconstructions.

作者备注:20 pages, 6 figures, supplementary material included. Preregistered: doi:10.5281/zenodo.23382486. Code and data: https://github.com/donti507/chessfly

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v2 · 2026-10-26 09:03 · 最新观测版本

Reconstruction differences rival individual differences in the fly compass connectome and break trained circuit models

Neural network models are increasingly constructed from synapse-resolution connectomes, and the same circuit is now available in reconstructions from other animals and pipelines. We do not know whether such models are dependent on the reconstruction they are built from, and whether connectome differences are biological or measurement errors. We studied the Drosophila head-direction circuit in nine versions: four flies (male CNS, hemibrain, FlyWire, BANC) and five variants of the same fly varying only by thresholds, proofreading or synapse detection. Using wiring-based correspondences validated by anatomical labels, we place all differences on one scale. A change of synapse detection within one fly changed the circuit more than halfway to the smallest between-fly difference on four distance measures; proofreading differences were smaller but depended on the metric, and left and right halves of one fly differed no more than random halves. Networks trained on each wiring to hold a cued heading developed near-perfect ring attractors, but their error increased from below 1 degree to 10-28 degrees when all weights changed by 1%. Training on each wiring did not transfer to any other connectome, including other versions of the same fly; refitting thirty cell-type gains, we repaired filtering-level differences but remaining error depended on wiring distance. Training with noise lowered precision and gave only partial transfer. In imaging data, the fly compass drifted gradually in darkness. Connectome-constrained models should report the reconstruction they were built on and be tested for robustness across reconstructions.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗