Sleep–wake states change the interictal localization of candidate epileptic source generators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare estimated epileptic source localizations from 5 sleep-wake states (SWS): wakefulness (W), rapid eye movement sleep (REM), and non-REM 1-3. METHODS: Electrical source localization (sLORETA) of interictal spikes from different SWS on surface EEG from the epilepsy monitoring unit at spike peak and take-off, with results mapped to individual brain models for 75% of patients. Concordance was defined as source localization voxels shared between 2 and 5 SWS, and discordance as those unique to 1 SWS against 1-4 other SWS. RESULTS: 563 spikes from 16 prospectively recruited focal epilepsy patients across 161 day-nights. SWS exerted significant differences at spike peak but not take-off. Source localization size did not vary between SWS. REM localizations were smaller in multifocal than unifocal patients (28.8% vs. 54.4%, p = .0091). All five SWS contributed about 45% of their localizations to converge onto 17.0 ± 15.5% voxels. Against any one other SWS, REM was least concordant (54.4% vs. 66.9%, p = .0006) and most discordant (39.3% vs. 29.6%, p = .0008). REM also yielded the most unique localizations (20.0% vs. 8.6%, p = .0059). CONCLUSIONS: REM was best suited to identify candidate epileptic sources. sLORETA proposes a model in which an "omni-concordant core" of source localizations shared by all five SWS is surrounded by a "penumbra" of source localizations shared by some but not all SWS. Uniquely, REM spares this core to "move" source voxels from the penumbra to unique cortex not localized by other SWS. This may reflect differential intra-spike propagation in REM, which may account for its reported superior localizing abilities.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".