Coupled Oscillators Model of Hyperexcitable Neuroglial Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glial populations within neuronal networks of the brain have recently gained much interest in the context of hyperexcitability and epilepsy. In this paper, we present an oscillator-based neuroglial model capable of generating Spontaneous Electrical Discharges (SEDs) in hyperexcitable conditions. The network is composed of 16 coupled Cognitive Rhythm Generators (CRGs), which are oscillator-based mathematical constructs previously described by our research team. CRGs are well-suited for modeling assemblies of excitable cells, and in this network, each represents one of the following populations: excitatory pyramidal cells, inhibitory interneurons, astrocytes, and microglia. We investigated various pathways leading to hyperexcitability, and our results suggest an important role for astrocytes and microglia in the generation of SEDs of various durations. Analysis of the resultant SEDs revealed two underlying duration distributions with differing properties. Particularly, short and long SEDs are associated with deterministic and random underlying processes, respectively. The mesoscale of this model makes it well-suited for (a) the elucidation of glia-related hypotheses in hyperexcitable conditions, (b) use as a testing platform for neuromodulation purposes, and (c) a hardware implementation for closed-loop neuromodulation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".