MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385767467 · doi:10.31083/j.jin2205111

Derailment of Sleep Homeostatic Plasticity Affects the Most Plastic Brain Systems and Carries the Risk of Epilepsy

2023· review· en· W4385767467 on OpenAlexaff
Péter Halász, Igor Timofeev, Anna Szűcs

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Integrative Neuroscience · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpileptogenesisEpilepsyNeuroscienceNon-rapid eye movement sleepHomeostatic plasticityPsychologySleep (system call)NeuroplasticitySynaptic plasticityMedicineMetaplasticityElectroencephalographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although a critical link between non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep and epilepsy has long been suspected, the interconnecting mechanisms have remained obscure. However, recent advances in sleep research have provided some clues. Sleep homeostatic plasticity is now recognized as an engine of the synaptic economy and a feature of the brain's ability to adapt to changing demands. This allows epilepsy to be understood as a cost of brain plasticity. On the one hand, plasticity is a force for development, but on the other it opens the possibility of epileptic derailment. Here, we provide a summary of the phenomena that link sleep and epilepsy. The concept of "system epilepsy", or epilepsy as a network disease, is introduced as a general approach to understanding the major epilepsy syndromes, i.e., epilepsies building upon functional brain networks. We discuss how epileptogenesis results in certain major epilepsies following the derailment of NREM sleep homeostatic plasticity. Post-traumatic epilepsy is presented as a general model for this kind of epileptogenesis.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Integrative NeuroscienceSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207