MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3109632285 · doi:10.1101/2020.11.30.404269

A theoretical framework for the site-specific and frequency-dependent neuronal effects of deep brain stimulation

2020· preprint· en· W3109632285 on OpenAlexaff
Luka Milosevic, Suneil K. Kalia, Mojgan Hodaie, Andrés M. Lozano, Miloš R. Popović, William D. Hutchison, Milad Lankarany

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersDystonia Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsNeuroscienceDeep brain stimulationExcitatory postsynaptic potentialSubthalamic nucleusStimulationMicrostimulationInhibitory postsynaptic potentialThalamusThalamic reticular nucleusPremovement neuronal activityBiologyPsychologyMedicineParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With the growing interest in the expansion of deep brain stimulation indications, we aimed to provide experimental and computational insights into the brain-region-specific and frequency-dependent effects of extracellular stimulation on human neuronal activity. Experimentally, we demonstrated microstimulation-evoked excitatory neuronal responses in the ventral intermediate nucleus and reticular thalamus, and inhibitory responses in the subthalamic nucleus and substantia nigra pars reticulata; hypothesized to be the result of simultaneous activations of convergent afferent inputs. Higher stimulation frequencies led to a loss of site-specificity and convergence towards neuronal suppression; hypothesized to be mediated by synaptic depression. These experimental findings were reproduced by a computational framework in which relative distributions of convergent excitatory/inhibitory afferents were embedded within a model of short-term synaptic plasticity for the prediction of site-specific and frequency-dependent responses to extracellular stimulation. This theoretical framework may aid in the design of physiologically-informed stimulation paradigms in existing or prospective deep brain stimulation indications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeurological disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→