MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280566118 · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2022.04.045

Sleep spindles track cortical learning patterns for memory consolidation

2022· article· en· W4280566118 on OpenAlexaff
Marit Petzka, Alex Chatburn, Ian Charest, George M. Balanos, Bernhard P. Staresina

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsMemory consolidationSleep spindleConsolidation (business)NeuroscienceProcedural memoryElectroencephalographySleep (system call)BiologyAssociative learningPsychologyCognitive psychologyNon-rapid eye movement sleepCognitionComputer scienceHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Memory consolidation-the transformation of labile memory traces into stable long-term representations-is facilitated by post-learning sleep. Computational and biophysical models suggest that sleep spindles may play a key mechanistic role for consolidation, igniting structural changes at cortical sites involved in prior learning. Here, we tested the resulting prediction that spindles are most pronounced over learning-related cortical areas and that the extent of this learning-spindle overlap predicts behavioral measures of memory consolidation. Using high-density scalp electroencephalography (EEG) and polysomnography (PSG) in healthy volunteers, we first identified cortical areas engaged during a temporospatial associative memory task (power decreases in the alpha/beta frequency range, 6-20 Hz). Critically, we found that participant-specific topographies (i.e., spatial distributions) of post-learning sleep spindle amplitude correlated with participant-specific learning topographies. Importantly, the extent to which spindles tracked learning patterns further predicted memory consolidation across participants. Our results provide empirical evidence for a role of post-learning sleep spindles in tracking learning networks, thereby facilitating memory consolidation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.768

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations60
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent BiologySame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207