Nucleus accumbens core and pathogenesis of compulsive checking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the role of the nucleus accumbens core (NAc) in the development of quinpirole-induced compulsive checking, rats received an excitotoxic lesion of NAc or sham lesion and were injected with quinpirole (0.5 mg/kg) or saline; development of checking behavior was monitored for 10 biweekly tests. The results showed that even after the NAc lesion, quinpirole still induced compulsive checking, suggesting that the pathogenic effects produced by quinpirole lie outside the NAc. Although the NAc lesion did not prevent the induction of compulsive checking, it altered how quickly it develops, suggesting that the NAc normally contributes toward the induction of compulsive checking. Saline-treated rats with an NAc lesion were hyperactive, but did not develop compulsive checking, indicating that hyperactivity by itself is not sufficient for the pathogenesis of compulsive checking. It is proposed that compulsive checking is the exaggerated output of a security motivation system and that the NAc serves as a neural hub for coordinating the orderly activity of neural modules of this motivational system. Evidence is considered suggesting that the neurobiological condition for the pathogenesis of compulsive checking is two-fold: activation of dopamine D2/D3 receptors without concurrent stimulation of D1-like receptors and long-term plastic changes related to quinpirole-induced sensitization.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".