MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216759090 · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2021.10.561

MOSAICS: An open-source Python platform for brain stimulation mapping analysis

2021· article· en· W3216759090 on OpenAlexaff
Bryce Geeraert, James G. Wrightson, Adam Kirton, Helen L. Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain stimulation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPython (programming language)Open sourceComputer scienceNeuroscienceProgramming languagePsychologySoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subthalamic (STN) rhythmic activity in the beta band (11e30 Hz range) is considered the most promising biomarker for controlling novel adaptive deep brain stimulation (aDBS) therapies in Parkinson's disease (PD).aDBS typically follows the amplitude (or power) of beta oscillations, which is sensitive to the clinical and dopaminergic state of the patient.An implicit assumption of this approach is that the frequency of the oscillation is fixed and thus does not convey any useful information about the state of the patient.Here we challenged this assumption by quantifying the temporal structure of both the amplitude and the frequency of STN beta oscillations, extracted from local field potential (LFP) recordings in patients OFF and ON medication.We specifically calculated the temporal variance of instantaneous amplitude (amplitude modulation, AM) and the temporal variance of instantaneous frequency (frequency modulation, FM).We found that beta AM decreases while and beta FM increases with dopaminergic medication, with significant within-and between-subjects interactions.Furthermore, two components of the instantaneous frequency signal (i.e. its slow part and the phase slips) differently contribute to the dopaminedependent interactions between AM and FM.These findings suggest that both AM and FM of STN beta oscillations jointly define the dopaminergic state of the patient and promote FM as a possible novel biomarker for aDBS in PD.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain stimulationSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207