Criticality and degeneracy in injury-induced changes in primary afferent excitability and the implications for neuropathic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuropathic pain remains notoriously difficult to treat despite numerous drug targets. Here, we offer a novel explanation for this intractability. Computer simulations predicted that qualitative changes in primary afferent excitability linked to neuropathic pain arise through a switch in spike initiation dynamics when molecular pathologies reach a tipping point (criticality), and that this tipping point can be reached via several different molecular pathologies (degeneracy). We experimentally tested these predictions by pharmacologically blocking native conductances and/or electrophysiologically inserting virtual conductances. Multiple different manipulations successfully reproduced or reversed neuropathic changes in primary afferents from naïve or nerve-injured rats, respectively, thus confirming the predicted criticality and its degenerate basis. Degeneracy means that several different molecular pathologies are individually sufficient to cause hyperexcitability, and because several such pathologies co-occur after nerve injury, that no single pathology is uniquely necessary. Consequently, single-target-drugs can be circumvented by maladaptive plasticity in any one of several ion channels. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02370.001.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".