MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956578430 · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00170

The Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis, Homeostatic Satiety, and Compulsions: What Can We Learn From Polydipsia?

2019· article· en· W2956578430 on OpenAlexaff
Tomek J Banasikowski, Emily R. Hawken

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStria terminalisNeurosciencePsychologyThirstNucleusBiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A compulsive phenotype characterizes several neuropsychiatric illnesses - including but not limited to - schizophrenia and obsessive compulsive disorder. Because of its perceived etiological heterogeneity, it is challenging to disentangle the specific neurophysiology that precipitates compulsive behaving. Using polydipsia (or non-regulatory water drinking), we describe candidate neural substrates of compulsivity. We further postulate that aberrant neuroplasticity within cortically projecting structures [i.e., the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST)] and circuits that encode homeostatic emotions (thirst, hunger, satiety, etc.) underlie compulsive drinking. By transducing an inaccurate signal that fails to represent true homeostatic state, cortical structures cannot select appropriate and adaptive actions. Additionally, augmented dopamine (DA) reactivity in striatal projections to and from the frontal cortex contribute to aberrant homeostatic signal propagation that ultimately biases cortex-dependent behavioral selection. Responding becomes rigid and corresponds with both erroneous, inflexible encoding in both bottom-up structures and in top-down pathways. How aberrant neuroplasticity in circuits that encode homeostatic emotion result in the genesis and maintenance of compulsive behaviors needs further investigation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Behavioral NeuroscienceSame topicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorFrench-language works237,207