MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005557049 · doi:10.1037/0735-7044.117.5.978

Growth of brain stimulation reward as a function of duration and stimulation strength.

2003· article· en· W2005557049 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Neuroscience · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrain stimulation rewardStimulationDuration (music)PsychologyAsymptoteBrain stimulationNeuroscienceMathematicsNucleus accumbensPhysicsCentral nervous systemMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The strength of a train of rewarding brain stimulation required to support a criterion level of operant performance declines hyperbolically as the duration is increased. This finding has been attributed to a process of leaky integration. However, the rate at which integration approaches asymptote has been shown to depend on stimulation strength, a finding that differs from the behavior of a simple leaky integrator. The authors replicate both findings and show that they are both well described by a new model that incorporates a hyperbolic strength-duration function, a logistic function mapping stimulation frequency onto reward intensity, and another logistic function mapping reward intensity onto performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.199 · 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