High-frequency transcranial alternating current stimulation matching individual frequency of somatosensory evoked high-frequency oscillations can modulate the somatosensory system through thalamocortical pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
tACS (transcranial alternating current stimulation) is a technique for modulating brain activity through electrical current. Its effects depend on cortical entrainment, which is most effective when transcranial alternating current stimulation matches the brain's natural rhythm. High-frequency oscillations produced by external stimuli are useful for studying the somatosensory pathway. Our study aims to explore transcranial alternating current stimulation's impact on the somatosensory system when synchronized with individual high-frequency oscillation frequencies. We conducted a randomized, sham-controlled study with 14 healthy participants. The study had three phases: Individualized transcranial alternating current stimulation (matching the individual's high-frequency oscillation rhythm), Standard transcranial alternating current stimulation (600 Hz), and sham stimulation. We measured early and late HFO components after median nerve electrical stimulation at three time points: before (T0), immediately after (T1), and 10 min after transcranial alternating current stimulation (T2). Compared to Sham and Standard stimulation Individualized transcranial alternating current stimulation significantly enhanced high-frequency oscillations, especially the early component, immediately after stimulation and for at least 15 min. No other effects were observed for other high-frequency oscillation measures. In summary, our study provides initial evidence that transcranial alternating current stimulation synchronized with an individual's high-frequency oscillation frequency can precisely and time-specifically modulate thalamocortical activity. These insights may pave the way for innovative, personalized neuromodulation methods for the somatosensory system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".