MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110718008 · doi:10.1101/lm.052464.120

Reliable induction of sleep spindles with intracranial electrical pulse stimulation

2020· article· en· W3110718008 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLearning & Memory · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsSleep spindleNeocortexStimulationNeuroscienceSleep (system call)Slow-wave sleepPsychologyElectroencephalographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neocortical sleep spindles have been shown to occur more frequently following a memory task, suggesting that a method to increase spindle activity could improve memory processing. Stimulation of the neocortex can elicit a slow oscillation (SO) and a spindle, but the feasibility of this method to boost SO and spindles over time has not been tested. In rats with implanted neocortical electrodes, stimulation during slow wave sleep significantly increased SO and spindle rates compared to control rest periods before and after the stimulation session. Coordination between hippocampal sharp-wave ripples and spindles also increased. These effects were reproducible across five consecutive days of testing, demonstrating the viability of this method to increase SO and spindles.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.242 · 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