Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sleep spindle activity has repeatedly been found to contribute to brain plasticity and consolidation of both declarative and procedural memories. Here we propose a framework for motor memory consolidation that outlines the essential contribution of the hierarchical and multi-scale periodicity of spindle activity, as well as of the synchronization and interaction of brain oscillations during this sleep-dependent process. We posit that the clustering of sleep spindles in 'trains', together with the temporally organized alternation between spindles and associated refractory periods, is critical for efficient reprocessing and consolidation of motor memories. We further argue that the long-term retention of procedural memories relies on the synchronized (functional connectivity) local reprocessing of new information across segregated, but inter-connected brain regions that are involved in the initial learning process. Finally, we propose that oscillatory synchrony in the spindle frequency band may reflect the cross-structural reactivation, reorganization and consolidation of motor, and potentially declarative, memory traces within broader subcortical-cortical networks during sleep. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue 'Memory reactivation: replaying events past, present and future'.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".