No aftereffects of high current density 10 Hz and 20 Hz tACS on sensorimotor alpha and beta oscillations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Application of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is thought to modulate ongoing brain oscillations in a frequency-dependent manner. However, recent studies report various and sometimes inconsistent results regarding its capacity to induce changes in cortical activity beyond the stimulation period. Here, thirty healthy volunteers participated in a randomized, cross-over, sham-controlled, double-blind study using EEG to measure the offline effects of tACS on alpha and beta power. Sham and high current density tACS (1 mA; 10 Hz and 20 Hz; 0.32 mA/cm2) were applied for 20 min over bilateral sensorimotor areas and EEG was recorded at rest before and after stimulation for 20 min. Bilateral tACS was not associated with significant changes in local alpha and beta power frequencies at stimulation sites (C3 and C4 electrodes). Overall, the present results fail to provide evidence that bilateral tACS with high current density applied over sensorimotor regions at 10 and 20 Hz reliably modulates offline brain oscillation power at the stimulation site. These results may have implications for the design and implementation of future protocols aiming to induce sustained changes in brain activity, including in clinical populations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".