Amphetamine-Induced Locomotion and Brain Stimulation Reward Research and Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amphetamine, a dopamine agonist, has an effect on increasing dopamine level in certain brain regions, like the nucleus accumben and the ventral tegmental area (Yoshida et al., 1992). Hence, it increases reward-related functions. In the current study, we examined the changes in the frequency of locomotion in previously habituated mice after 3mg/kg amphetamine injections. In the same way, we also monitored the changes in bar pressing rates of previously trained rates after 2mg/kg amphetamine injections. Though not showing a significant statistical result, both graphs and discussions supported that amphetamine injection increased horizontal quadrants crossings compared with saline injection. While the amphetamine administration increased bar press rate in previously trained rats at low frequencies, it led the rats to fewer bar presses at higher frequencies compared with both the baseline and the saline condition. The results of both experiments consistent with past studies which claim that amphetamine acts as a dopaminergic agonist and increases reinforcing capacity through enhancement of dopaminergic transmission (Gallistel & Karras, 1984).
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".