MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404297718 · doi:10.1038/s42003-024-07197-z

Motor learning promotes regionally-specific spindle-slow wave coupled cerebral memory reactivation

2024· article· en· W4404297718 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Baena, Ella Gabitov, L. Bryan Ray, Julien Doyon, Stuart Fogel

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceMotor learningPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sleep is essential for the optimal consolidation of newly acquired memories. This study examines the neurophysiological processes underlying memory consolidation during sleep, via reactivation. Here, we investigated the impact of slow wave - spindle (SW-SP) coupling on regionally-task-specific brain reactivations following motor sequence learning. Utilizing simultaneous EEG-fMRI during sleep, our findings revealed that memory reactivation occured time-locked to coupled SW-SP complexes, and specifically in areas critical for motor sequence learning. Notably, these reactivations were confined to the hemisphere actively involved in learning the task. This regional specificity highlights a precise and targeted neural mechanism, underscoring the crucial role of SW-SP coupling. In addition, we observed double-dissociation whereby primary sensory areas were recruited time-locked to uncoupled spindles; suggesting a role for uncoupled spindles in sleep maintenance. These findings advance our understanding the functional significance of SW-SP coupling for enhancing memory in a regionally-specific manner, that is functionally dissociable from uncoupled spindles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207