A Synaptic Model for Pain: Long-Term Potentiation in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigation of molecular and cellular mechanisms of synaptic plasticity is the major focus of many neuroscientists. There are two major reasons for searching new genes and molecules contributing to central plasticity: first, it provides basic neural mechanism for learning and memory, a key function of the brain; second, it provides new targets for treating brain-related disease. Long-term potentiation (LTP), mostly intensely studies in the hippocampus and amygdala, is proposed to be a cellular model for learning and memory. Although it remains difficult to understand the roles of LTP in hippocampus-related memory, a role of LTP in fear, a simplified form of memory, has been established. Here, I will review recent cellular studies of LTP in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and then compare studies in vivo and in vitro LTP by genetic/ pharmacological approaches. I propose that ACC LTP may serve as a cellular model for studying central sensitization that related to chronic pain, as well as pain-related cognitive emotional disorders. Understanding signaling pathways related to ACC LTP may help us to identify novel drug target for various mental disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".