Effects of expectation on amygdala‐kindled convulsions and interictal behaviour in rats: confirmation of a Pavlovian mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We found evidence that the effects of exposure to the stimulation environment on the convulsions and interictal behaviour of basolateral amygdala (BA)-kindled rats are the result of Pavlovian conditioning. In Experiment 1, the rats first received 45 BA stimuli in one environment (CS+) and 45 sham stimuli in another environment (CS-). During this first phase of the experiment, the CS+ and CS- began to exert differential effects on interictal behaviour and convulsions. Then, during the second phase, rats received 45 stimuli and 45 sham stimuli, either as before in their original CS+ and CS- (nonreversal rats) or with their original CS+ and CS- interchanged (reversal rats). During the second phase, the CS+ and CS- continued to exert the same pattern of differential effects on the interictal behaviour and convulsions of the nonreversal rats, whereas the reversal rats began to display the reverse pattern. In Experiment 2, rats received 60 sham stimuli in one environment (CS1). Then, half of the rats received 30 stimuli in a second environment (CS2) and 30 sham stimuli in CS1 (no-pre-exposure rats), whereas the other half (pre-exposure rats) received 30 stimuli and 30 sham stimuli in CS1. Pre-exposure to the stimulation environment attenuated the kindled convulsions. These findings confirm that the conditioned effects of kindling are mediated by a Pavlovian mechanism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".