Dynamics of Parkinsonian tremor during deep brain stimulation
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 mechanism by which chronic, high frequency, electrical deep brain stimulation (HF-DBS) suppresses tremor in Parkinson's disease is unknown. Rest tremor in subjects with Parkinson's disease receiving HF-DBS was recorded continuously throughout switching the deep brain stimulator on (at an effective frequency) and off. These data suggest that the stimulation induces a qualitative change in the dynamics, called a Hopf bifurcation, so that the stable oscillations are destabilized. We hypothesize that the periodic stimulation modifies a parameter affecting the oscillation in a time dependent way and thereby induces a Hopf bifurcation. We explore this hypothesis using a schematic network model of an oscillator interacting with periodic stimulation. The mechanism of time-dependent change of a control parameter in the model captures two aspects of the dynamics observed in the data: (1) a gradual increase in tremor amplitude when the stimulation is switched off and a gradual decrease in tremor amplitude when the stimulation is switched on and (2) a time delay in the onset and offset of the oscillations. This mechanism is consistent with these rest tremor transition data and with the idea that HF-DBS acts via the gradual change of a network property. (c) 2001 American Institute of Physics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it