Dynamic mechanisms that couple the brain and breathing to the external environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain and breathing activities are closely related. However, the exact neurophysiological mechanisms that couple the brain and breathing to stimuli in the external environment are not yet agreed upon. Our data support that synchronization and dynamic attunement are two key mechanisms that couple local brain activity and breathing to external periodic stimuli. First, we review the existing literature, which provides strong evidence for the synchronization of brain and breathing in terms of coherence, cross-frequency coupling and phase-based entrainment. Second, using EEG and breathing data, we show that both the lungs and localized brain activity at the Cz channel attune the temporal structure of their power spectra to the periodic structure of external auditory inputs. We highlight the role of dynamic attunement in playing a key role in coordinating the tripartite temporal alignment of localized brain activity, breathing and input dynamics across longer timescales like minutes. Overall, this perspective sheds light on potential mechanisms of brain-breathing coupling and its alignment to stimuli in the external environment.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".