MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991841285 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0224669

Functional connectivity dynamics slow with descent from wakefulness to sleep

2019· article· en· W2991841285 on OpenAlexafffund
Mazen El-Baba, Daniel J. Lewis, Zhuo Fang, Adrian M. Owen, Stuart Fogel, J. Bruce Morton

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of OttawaWestern UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersRobarts Research InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsWakefulnessSleep (system call)NeuroscienceElectroencephalographyDynamic functional connectivityPsychologyFunctional connectivityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transition from wakefulness to sleep is accompanied by widespread changes in brain functioning. Here we investigate the implications of this transition for interregional functional connectivity and their dynamic changes over time. Simultaneous EEG-fMRI was used to measure brain functional activity of 21 healthy participants as they transitioned from wakefulness into sleep. fMRI volumes were independent component analysis (ICA)-decomposed, yielding 42 neurophysiological sources. Static functional connectivity (FC) was estimated from independent component time courses. A sliding window method and k-means clustering (k = 7, L2-norm) were used to estimate dynamic FC. Static FC in Wake and Stage-2 Sleep (NREM2) were largely similar. By contrast, FC dynamics across wake and sleep differed, with transitions between FC states occurring more frequently during wakefulness than during NREM2. Evidence of slower FC dynamics during sleep is discussed in relation to sleep-related reductions in effective connectivity and synaptic strength.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207