MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W150009358 · doi:10.1093/sleep/23.6.1d

Dynamics of Slow-Wave Activity During the NREM Sleep of Sleepwalkers and Control Subjects

2000· article· en· W150009358 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène Gaudreau, Steve Joncas, Antonio Zadra, Jacques Montplaisir

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNon-rapid eye movement sleepSleep (system call)Slow-wave sleepMedicineSleep StagesPsychologyElectroencephalographyAudiologyAnesthesiaPolysomnographyNeuroscienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the number and distribution of awakenings from slow-wave sleep (SWS) and both the power and dynamics of EEG slow-wave activity (SWA) in sleepwalkers and controls. Somnambulism is considered to be a disorder of arousal from NREM sleep and related to anomalous SWS and SWA. Power spectral analyses have never been used to quantify patients' SWA across sleep cycles. DESIGN: N/A SETTING: N/A PATIENTS: A polysomnographic study was performed on 15 adult sleepwalkers and 15 age- and sex-matched controls. INTERVENTIONS: N/A MEASUREMENTS & RESULTS: Sleepwalkers had a significantly greater number of awakenings from SWS than did control subjects. Controls showed a greater decrease in SWA across NREM cycles. Sleepwalkers had a significantly lower level of SWA during the first NREM period, where most awakenings take place. CONCLUSION: Sleepwalkers appear to suffer from an abnormality in the neural mechanisms responsible for the regulation of SWS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations167
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207