MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295028212 · doi:10.1101/2022.09.06.22279626

Effective connectivity of emotion and cognition under psilocybin

2022· preprint· en· W4295028212 on OpenAlexaff
Devon Stoliker, Leonardo Novelli, Franz X. Vollenweider, Gary F. Egan, Katrin H. Preller, Adeel Razi

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsilocybinDefault mode networkPsychologyAmygdalaHallucinogenNeuroscienceCognitionSalience (neuroscience)Cognitive psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Classic psychedelics alter sense of self and patterns of self-related thought. These changes are hypothesised to underlie their therapeutic efficacy across internalising pathologies such as addiction and depression. Using resting-state functional MRI images from a randomised, double blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial of 24 healthy adults under 0.215mg/kg psilocybin, we investigated how psilocybin modulates the effective connectivity between resting state networks and the amygdala that are involved in the appraisal and regulation of emotion and association with clinical symptoms. The networks included the default mode network (DMN), salience network (SN) and central executive network (CEN). Psilocybin decreased top-down effective connectivity from the resting state networks to the amygdala and decreased effective connectivity within the DMN and SN, while the within CEN effective connectivity increased. Effective connectivity changes were also associated with altered emotion and meaning under psilocybin. Our findings identify changes to cognitive-emotional connectivity associated with the subjective effects of psilocybin and the attenuation of the amygdala signal as a potential biomarker of psilocybin’s therapeutic efficacy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207