MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160512736 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2012.00040

The Fate of Incoming Stimuli during NREM Sleep is Determined by Spindles and the Phase of the Slow Oscillation

2012· article· en· W2160512736 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Manuel Schabus, Thien Thanh Dang‐Vu, Dominik Philip Johannes Heib, Mélanie Boly, Martin Desseilles, Gilles Vandewalle, Christina Schmidt, Geneviève Albouy, Annabelle Darsaud, Steffen Gais, Christian Degueldre, Evelyne Balteau, Christophe Phillips, André Luxen, Pierre Maquet

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFondation Médicale Reine ElisabethCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAustrian Science FundDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsNon-rapid eye movement sleepSleep spindleNeurosciencePsychologyWakefulnessK-complexElectroencephalographyNeuroscience of sleepSleep (system call)ThalamusAudiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study aimed at identifying the neurophysiological responses associated with auditory stimulation during non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep using simultaneous electroencephalography (EEG)/functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) recordings. It was reported earlier that auditory stimuli produce bilateral activation in auditory cortex, thalamus, and caudate during both wakefulness and NREM sleep. However, due to the spontaneous membrane potential fluctuations cortical responses may be highly variable during NREM. Here we now examine the modulation of cerebral responses to tones depending on the presence or absence of sleep spindles and the phase of the slow oscillation. Thirteen healthy young subjects were scanned successfully during stage 2-4 NREM sleep in the first half of the night in a 3 T scanner. Subjects were not sleep-deprived and sounds were post hoc classified according to (i) the presence of sleep spindles or (ii) the phase of the slow oscillation during (±300 ms) tone delivery. These detected sounds were then entered as regressors of interest in fMRI analyses. Interestingly wake-like responses - although somewhat altered in size and location - persisted during NREM sleep, except during present spindles (as previously published in Dang-Vu et al., 2011) and the negative going phase of the slow oscillation during which responses became less consistent or even absent. While the phase of the slow oscillation did not alter brain responses in primary sensory cortex, it did modulate responses at higher cortical levels. In addition EEG analyses show a distinct N550 response to tones during the presence of light sleep spindles and suggest that in deep NREM sleep the brain is more responsive during the positive going slope of the slow oscillation. The presence of short temporal windows during which the brain is open to external stimuli is consistent with the fact that even during deep sleep meaningful events can be detected. Altogether, our results emphasize the notion that spontaneous fluctuations of brain activity profoundly modify brain responses to external information across all behavioral states, including deep NREM sleep.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations190
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207