MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382049497 · doi:10.1101/2023.06.23.546219

Hippocampal sharp-wave ripples correlate with naturally occurring self-generated thoughts in humans

2023· preprint· en· W4382049497 on OpenAlexaff
Takamitsu Iwata, Takufumi Yanagisawa, Yuji Ikegaya, Jonathan Smallwood, Ryohei Fukuma, Satoru Oshino, Naoki Tani, Hui Ming Khoo, Haruhiko Kishima

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMind wandering and attention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersMoonshot Research and Development ProgramExploratory Research for Advanced TechnologyJapan Science and Technology AgencyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCore Research for Evolutional Science and TechnologyJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsHippocampal formationHippocampusPsychologyCognitive psychologyCognitionNeuroscienceTask (project management)Focus (optics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Core features of human cognition, for example, the experience of mind wandering, highlight the importance of the capacity to focus on information separate from the here and now. However, the brain mechanisms that underpin these self-generated states remain unclear. An emerging hypothesis is that self-generated states depend on the process of memory replay, which, in animals, is linked to sharp-wave ripples (SWRs) originating in the hippocampus. SWRs are transient high-frequency oscillations that exhibit circadian fluctuations and, in the laboratory, are important for memory and planning. Local field potentials were recorded from the hippocampus of 11 patients with epilepsy for up to 15 days, and experience sampling was used to describe their association with ongoing thought patterns. SWRs were correlated with patterns of vivid, intrusive ongoing thoughts unrelated to the task being performed, establishing their contribution to the ongoing thoughts that humans experience in daily life.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMind wandering and attentionFrench-language works237,207