Alertness fluctuations when performing a task modulate cortical evoked responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been widely used in human cognitive neuroscience to examine the causal role of distinct cortical areas in perceptual, cognitive and motor functions. However, it is widely acknowledged that the effects of focal cortical stimulation can vary substantially between participants and even from trial to trial within individuals. Recent work from resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies has suggested that spontaneous fluctuations in alertness over a testing session can modulate the neural dynamics of cortical processing, even when participants remain awake and responsive to the task at hand. Here we investigated the extent to which spontaneous fluctuations in alertness during wake-to-sleep transition can account for the variability in neurophysiological responses to TMS. We combined single-pulse TMS with neural recording via electroencephalography (EEG) to quantify changes in motor and cortical reactivity with fluctuating levels of alertness defined objectively on the basis of ongoing brain activity. We observed rapid, non-linear changes in TMS-evoked responses with decreasing levels of alertness, even while participants remained responsive in the behavioural task. Specifically, we found that the amplitude of motor evoked potentials peaked during periods of EEG flattening, whereas TMS-evoked potentials increased and remained stable during EEG flattening and the subsequent occurrence of theta ripples that indicate the onset of NREM stage 1 sleep. Our findings suggest a rapid and complex reorganization of active neural networks in response to spontaneous fluctuations of alertness over relatively short periods of behavioural testing during wake-to-sleep transition.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".