A dual-receptor model of serotonergic psychedelics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Serotonergic psychedelics have been identified as promising next-generation therapeutic agents in the treatment of mood and anxiety disorders. While their efficacy has been increasingly validated, the mechanism by which they exert a therapeutic effect is still debated. A popular theoretical account is that excessive 5-HT2a agonism disrupts cortical dynamics, relaxing the precision of maladaptive high-level beliefs and making them more malleable and open to revision. We extend this perspective by developing a simple energy-based model of cortical dynamics based on predictive processing which incorporates effects of neuromodulation. Using this model, we propose and simulate hypothetical computational mechanisms for both 5-HT2a and 5-HT1a agonism. Results from our model are able to account for a number of existing empirical observations concerning serotonergic psychedelics effects on cognition and affect. Using the findings of our model, we provide a theoretically-grounded hypothesis for the clinical success of LSD, psilocybin, and DMT, as well as identify the design space of biased 5-HT1a agonist psychedelics such as 5-MeO-DMT as potentially fruitful in the development of more effective and tolerable psychotherapeutic agents in the future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".