Regulating the Global Politico-Economic Order: The Functioning of the Development Assistance Provision Regime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cortical sensory systems are active with rich patterns of activity during sleep and under light anesthesia. Remarkably, this activity shares many characteristics with those present when the awake brain responds to sensory stimuli. We review two specific forms of such activity: slow-wave activity (SWA) in the adult brain and spindle bursts in developing brain. SWA is composed of 0.5-4 Hz resting potential fluctuations. Although these fluctuations synchronize wide regions of cortex, recent large-scale imaging has shown spatial details of their distribution that reflect underlying cortical structural projections and networks. These networks are regulated, as prior awake experiences alter both the spatial and temporal features of SWA in subsequent sleep. Activity patterns of the immature brain, however, are very different from those of the adult. SWA is absent, and the dominant pattern is spindle bursts, intermittent high frequency oscillations superimposed on slower depolarizations within sensory cortices. These bursts are driven by intrinsic brain activity, which act to generate peripheral inputs, for example via limb twitches. They are present within developing sensory cortex before they are mature enough to exhibit directed movements and respond to external stimuli. Like in the adult, these patterns resemble those evoked by sensory stimulation when awake. It is suggested that spindle-burst activity is generated purposefully by the developing nervous system as a proxy for true external stimuli. While the sleep-related functions of both slow-wave and spindle-burst activity may not be entirely clear, they reflect robust regulated phenomena which can engage select wide-spread cortical circuits. These circuits are similar to those activated during sensory processing and volitional events. We highlight these two patterns of brain activity because both are prominent and well-studied forms of spontaneous activity that will yield valuable insights into brain function in the coming years.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".