MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225774171 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abl6989

Trips and neurotransmitters: Discovering principled patterns across 6850 hallucinogenic experiences

2022· article· en· W4225774171 on OpenAlexaff
Galen Ballentine, Sam Friedman, Danilo Bzdok

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstituteMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsNeuroscienceSensory systemAssociation (psychology)Neurotransmitter receptorPsychologyHallucinogenConsciousnessBiologyCognitive psychologyReceptorPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychedelics probably alter states of consciousness by disrupting how the higher association cortex governs bottom-up sensory signals. Individual hallucinogenic drugs are usually studied in participants in controlled laboratory settings. Here, we have explored word usage in 6850 free-form testimonials about 27 drugs through the prism of 40 neurotransmitter receptor subtypes, which were then mapped to three-dimensional coordinates in the brain via their gene transcription levels from invasive tissue probes. Despite high interindividual variability, our pattern-learning approach delineated how drug-induced changes of conscious awareness are linked to cortex-wide anatomical distributions of receptor density proxies. Each discovered receptor-experience factor spanned between a higher-level association pole and a sensory input pole, which may relate to the previously reported collapse of hierarchical order among large-scale networks. Coanalyzing many psychoactive molecules and thousands of natural language descriptions of drug experiences, our analytical framework finds the underlying semantic structure and maps it directly to the brain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations66
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207