MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280492570 · doi:10.5772/intechopen.104787

Cortical Plasticity under Ketamine: From Synapse to Map

2022· book-chapter· en· W4280492570 on OpenAlexafffund
Afef Ouelhazi, Rudy Lussiez, Stéphane Molotchnikoff

Bibliographic record

VenueIntechOpen eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceNeuroplasticityStimulus (psychology)Visual cortexSensory systemSynaptic plasticityCortical neuronsPsychologyBiologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sensory systems need to process signals in a highly dynamic way to efficiently respond to variations in the animal’s environment. For instance, several studies showed that the visual system is subject to neuroplasticity since the neurons’ firing changes according to stimulus properties. This dynamic information processing might be supported by a network reorganization. Since antidepressants influence neurotransmission, they can be used to explore synaptic plasticity sustaining cortical map reorganization. To this goal, we investigated in the primary visual cortex (V1 of mouse and cat), the impact of ketamine on neuroplasticity through changes in neuronal orientation selectivity and the functional connectivity between V1 cells, using cross correlation analyses. We found that ketamine affects cortical orientation selectivity and alters the functional connectivity within an assembly. These data clearly highlight the role of the antidepressant drugs in inducing or modeling short-term plasticity in V1 which suggests that cortical processing is optimized and adapted to the properties of the stimulus.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntechOpen eBooksSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207