MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001203561 · doi:10.1038/s41398-020-0713-1

Stress impacts sensory variability through cortical sensory activity motifs

2020· article· en· W3001203561 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander McGirr, Jeffrey LeDue, Allen W. Chan, James D. Boyd, Paul D. Metzak, Timothy H. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of Canada
KeywordsSensory systemSomatosensory systemNeuroscienceSensory processingSensory gatingNeocortexSensory cortexPsychologyGating

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medically unexplained symptoms in depression are common. These individual-specific complaints are often considered an 'idiom of distress', yet animal studies suggest that cortical sensory representations are flexible and influenced by spontaneous cortical activity. We hypothesized that stress would reveal activity dynamics in somatosensory cortex resulting in greater sensory-evoked response variability. Using millisecond resolution in vivo voltage sensitive dye (VSD) imaging in mouse neocortex, we characterized spontaneous regional depolarizations within limb and barrel regions of somatosensory cortex, or spontaneous sensory motifs, and their influence on sensory variability. Stress revealed an idiosyncratic increase in spontaneous sensory motifs that is normalized by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment. Spontaneous motif frequency is associated with increased variability in sensory-evoked responses, and we optogenetically demonstrate that regional depolarization in somatosensory cortex increases sensory-evoked variability for seconds. This reveals a putative circuit level target for changes in sensory processing and for unexplained physical complaints in stress-related psychopathology.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational PsychiatrySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207