MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157617740 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2004.831520

Control of State Transitions in an In Silico Model of Epilepsy Using Small Perturbations

2004· article· en· W2157617740 on OpenAlexaff
A.W.L. Chiu, Berj L. Bardakjian

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkChaoticNonlinear systemGaussianControl theory (sociology)Perturbation (astronomy)Computer scienceState variableTopology (electrical circuits)PhysicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose the use of artificial neural networks in an in silico epilepsy model of biological neural networks: 1) to predict the onset of state transitions from higher complexities, possibly chaotic to lower complexity possibly rhythmic activities; and 2) to restore the original higher complexity activity. A coupled nonlinear oscillators model (Bardakjian and Diamant, 1994) was used to represent the spontaneous seizure-like oscillations of CA3 hippocampal neurons (Bardakjian and Aschebrenner-Scheibe, 1995) to illustrate the prediction and control schemes of these state transition onsets. Our prediction scheme consists of a recurrent neural network having Gaussian nonlinearities. When the onset of lower complexity activity is predicted in the in silico model, then our control scheme consists of applying a small perturbation to a system variable (i.e., the transmembrane voltage) when it is sufficiently close to the unstable higher complexity manifold. The system state can be restored back to its higher complexity mode utilizing the forces of the system's vector field.

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 score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations21
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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