A scoping review for building a criticality-based conceptual framework of altered states of consciousness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The healthy conscious brain is thought to operate near a critical state, reflecting optimal information processing and high susceptibility to external stimuli. Conversely, deviations from the critical state are hypothesized to give rise to altered states of consciousness (ASC). Measures of criticality could therefore be an effective way of establishing the conscious state of an individual. Furthermore, characterizing the direction of a deviation from criticality may enable the development of treatment strategies for pathological ASC. The aim of this scoping review is to assess the current evidence supporting the criticality hypothesis, and the use of criticality as a conceptual framework for ASC. Using the PRISMA guidelines, Web of Science and PubMed were searched from inception to February 7th 2022 to find articles relating to measures of criticality across ASC. N = 427 independent papers were initially found on the subject. N = 378 were excluded because they were either: not related to criticality; not related to consciousness; not presenting results from a primary study; presenting model data. N = 49 independent papers were included in the present research, separated in 7 sub-categories of ASC: disorders of consciousness (DOC) (n = 5); sleep (n = 13); anesthesia (n = 18); epilepsy (n = 12); psychedelics and shamanic state of consciousness (n = 4); delirium (n = 1); meditative state (n = 2). Each category included articles suggesting a deviation of the critical state. While most studies were only able to identify a deviation from criticality without being certain of its direction, the preliminary consensus arising from the literature is that non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep reflects a subcritical state, epileptic seizures reflect a supercritical state, and psychedelics are closer to the critical state than normal consciousness. This scoping review suggests that, though the literature is limited and methodologically inhomogeneous, ASC are characterized by a deviation from criticality, though its direction is not clearly reported in a majority of studies. Criticality could become, with more extensive research, an effective and objective way to characterize ASC, and help identify therapeutic avenues to improve criticality in pathological brain states. Furthermore, we suggest how anesthesia and psychedelics could potentially be used as neuromodulation techniques to restore criticality in DOC.
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 | 0.049 | 0.150 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.068 | 0.042 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".