Alpha rhythm and Alzheimer’s disease: Has Hans Berger’s dream come true?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this "centenary" paper, an expert panel revisited Hans Berger's groundbreaking discovery of human restingstate electroencephalographic (rsEEG) alpha rhythms (8-12 Hz) in 1924, his foresight of substantial clinical applications in patients with "senile dementia," and new developments in the field, focusing on Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most prevalent cause of dementia in pathological aging. Clinical guidelines issued in 2024 by the US National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA) and the European Neuroscience Societies did not endorse routine use of rsEEG biomarkers in the clinical workup of older adults with cognitive impairment. Nevertheless, the expert panel highlighted decades of research from independent workgroups and different techniques showing consistent evidence that abnormalities in rsEEG delta, theta, and alpha rhythms (< 30 Hz) observed in AD patients correlate with wellestablished AD biomarkers of neuropathology, neurodegeneration, and cognitive decline. We posit that these abnormalities may reflect alterations in oscillatory synchronization within subcortical and cortical circuits, inducing cortical inhibitory-excitatory imbalance (in some cases leading to epileptiform activity) and vigilance dysfunctions (e.g., mental fatigue and drowsiness), which may impact AD patients' quality of life. Berger's vision of using EEG to understand and manage dementia in pathological aging is still actual.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".