Investigators' Workshop Saturday Evening Session I 6:00 p.m.‐7:30 p.m.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ronit M. Pressler*, Massimo Avoli†, Solomon L. Moshe‡ and Shlomo Shinnar§ *Clinical Neurophysiology, Telemetry Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, United Kingdom; †Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Physiology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; ‡Pediatric Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY and §Pediatric Neurology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY Summary: Epileptiform discharges not accompanied by obvious clinical events are regarded as subclinical or interictal. They are found in up to 80% of patients with epilepsy but are only weakly related to seizure frequency or seizure severity. Indeed their clinical relevance in highly controversial and a principle of treatment is to avoid over‐interpretation of epileptiform activity. Experimental data shows that interictal spikes and ictal discharges are generated by different populations of neuron through different cellular and network mechanisms and may represent a condition that delays or prevents seizure onset. However, in the immature brain seizure discharges may cause neuronal cell loss. In older children and adults interictal discharges can be accompanied by brief interruption of cognitive function even in the absence of overt seizures (transitory cognitive impairment). In children with Landau‐Kleffner syndrome and CSWS (continuous spike‐waves during slow sleep) prolonged nocturnal discharges can have devastating effects on language and / or behavior. This multi‐disciplinary workshop will discuss the pathophysiology of interictal discharges and the significance of epileptiform activity in neonates and in older children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.482 | 0.332 |
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".