Bibliographic record
Abstract
The brain remains the most complex organ within the mammalian body with an immense capacity for plasticity and change throughout an individual’s life history. This review examines brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and endocannabinoid (eCB) signalling cross-talk within a variety of neurodevelopmental, genic, and plastic processes that occur in the brain. The action of eCB and BDNF cross-talk in embryonic and adult neurogenesis is a bidirectional dynamic process of high complexity that facilitates neural proliferation, differentiation, spatial development, synaptic development, and programmed cell death events. The coupled action of BDNF eCB signalling serves as a functional regulator of neuroplasticity, modulating synaptic signalling strength within both inhibitory and excitatory neurons. This also regulates long-term potentiation and long-term depression processes, which play important roles in the neurobiology of learning and memory. Understanding BDNF and eCB signalling has the potential to offer new insights into brain function and develop novel therapeutic treatment for psychiatric disorders, neurodegenerative disorders, and brain injury recovery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.009 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".