MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166516238 · doi:10.1162/089976602753284437

Mechanisms Shaping Fast Excitatory Postsynaptic Currents in the Central Nervous System

2002· review· en· W2166516238 on OpenAlexaff
M.I. Glavinoviċ

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Computation · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceExcitatory postsynaptic potentialAMPA receptorPostsynaptic CurrentGlutamate receptorPostsynaptic potentialDesensitization (medicine)Computer scienceBiologyReceptorInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How different factors contribute to determine the time course of the basic element of fast glutamate-mediated excitatory postsynaptic currents (mEPSCs) in the central nervous system has been a focus of interest of neurobiologists for some years. In spite of intensive investigations, these mechanisms are not well understood. In this review, basic hypotheses are summarized, and a new hypothesis is proposed, which holds that desensitization of AMPA receptors plays a major role in shaping the time course of fast mEPSCs. According to the new hypothesis, desensitization shortens the time course of mEPSCs largely by reducing the buffering of glutamate molecules by AMPA receptors. The hypothesis accounts for numerous findings on fast mEPSCs and is expected to be equally fruitful as a framework for further experimental and theoretical investigations.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural ComputationSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207