MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015112700 · doi:10.1098/rstb.2019.0230

A mechanism for learning with sleep spindles

2020· review· en· W3015112700 on OpenAlexafffund
Adrien Peyrache, Julie Seibt

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWellcome Trust
KeywordsMemory consolidationNeuroscienceNon-rapid eye movement sleepSleep spindleMechanism (biology)Sleep (system call)PsychologyComputer scienceEye movementHippocampusPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spindles are ubiquitous oscillations during non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep. A growing body of evidence points to a possible link with learning and memory, and the underlying mechanisms are now starting to be unveiled. Specifically, spindles are associated with increased dendritic activity and high intracellular calcium levels, a situation favourable to plasticity, as well as with control of spiking output by feed-forward inhibition. During spindles, thalamocortical networks become unresponsive to inputs, thus potentially preventing interference between memory-related internal information processing and extrinsic signals. At the system level, spindles are co-modulated with other major NREM oscillations, including hippocampal sharp wave-ripples (SWRs) and neocortical slow waves, both previously shown to be associated with learning and memory. The sequential occurrence of reactivation at the time of SWRs followed by neuronal plasticity-promoting spindles is a possible mechanism to explain NREM sleep-dependent consolidation of memories. 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.161 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations100
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207