MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019013825 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2014.2327055

The Effects of HCN and KLT Ion Channels on Adaptation and Refractoriness in a Stochastic Auditory Nerve Model

2014· article· en· W2019013825 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed H. Negm, Ian C. Bruce

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefractory periodNeuroscienceAdaptation (eye)Ion channelNeurophysiologyComputer sciencePhysicsMedicinePsychologyAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An accurate model of auditory nerve fibers (ANFs) may assist in developing improved cochlear implant (CI) stimulation strategies. Previous studies have shown that the original Hodgkin-Huxley (HH) model may be better at describing nodes of Ranvier in ANFs than models for other mammalian axon types. However, the HH model is still unable to explain a number of phenomena observed in auditory nerve responses to CI stimulation such as adaptation to high-rate stimulation and the time course of relative refractoriness. Recent physiological investigations of ANFs have shown the presence of a number of ion channel types not considered in the previous modeling studies, including low-threshold potassium (KLT) channels and hyperpolarization-activated cation (HCN) channels. In this paper, we investigate inclusion of these ion channel types in a stochastic HH model of a single node of Ranvier. Simulation results for pulse trains with rates of 200, 800, and 2000 pulse/s suggests that both the KLT channels and HCN channels can produce adaptation in the spike rate. However, the adaptation due to KLT is restricted to higher stimulation rates, whereas the adaptation due to HCN is observed across all stimulation rates. Additionally, using pulse pairs it was found that KLT increased both the absolute and the relative refractory periods. HCN on its own increased just the relative refractory period, but produced a synergistic increase in the absolute refractory period when combined with KLT. Together these results argue strongly for the need to consider HCN and KLT channels when studying CI stimulation of ANFs.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations42
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207