Quantitative EEG of Rapid-Eye-Movement Sleep
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The basal forebrain cholinergic system, which is impaired in early Alzheimer's disease, is more crucial for the activation of rapid-eye-movement (REM) sleep electroencephalogram (EEG) than it is for wakefulness. Quantitative EEG from REM sleep might thus provide an earlier and more accurate marker of the development of Alzheimer's disease in subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects than that from wakefulness. To assess the superiority of the REM sleep EEG as a screening tool for preclinical Alzheimer's disease, 22 subjects with amnestic MCI (a-MCI; 63.9±7.7 years), 10 subjects with nonamnestic MCI (na-MCI; 64.1±4.5 years) and 32 controls (63.7±6.6 years) participated in the study. Spectral analyses of the waking EEG and REM sleep EEG were performed and the [(delta+theta)/(alpha+beta)] ratio was used to assess between-group differences in EEG slowing. The a-MCI subgroup showed EEG slowing in frontal lateral regions compared to both na-MCI and control groups. This EEG slowing was present in wakefulness (compared to controls) but was much more prominent in REM sleep. Moreover, the comparison between amnestic and nonamnestic subjects was found significant only for the REM sleep EEG. There was no difference in EEG power ratio between na-MCI and controls for any of the 7 cortical regions studied. These findings demonstrate the superiority of the REM sleep EEG in the discrimination between a-MCI and both na-MCI and control subjects.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it