MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407934936 · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2024.12.106

Alpha rhythm subharmonics underlie responsiveness to theta burst stimulation via selective calcium plasticity

2025· article· en· W4407934936 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Kadak, Davide Momi, Zheng Wang, Sorenza P Bastiaens, Mohammad Oveisi, Taha Morshedzadeh, Minarose Ismail, Jan Fousek, John D. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain stimulation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceRhythmStimulationAlpha (finance)PlasticityPsychologyMedicineInternal medicinePhysicsDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bayesian optimization is a promising method for this end.It allows to approximate noisy functions with only a limited number of samples.It allows efficient, adaptive sampling methods: Acquisition functions allow sampling in locations that are likely to give valuable insights.Thus, more information can be collected in a smaller number of samples.In this presentation, we illustrate how different variables such as the mphase of electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings, coil location, and orientation can be optimized.In this context, we demonstrate that the number of samples required to find a good target are substantially decreased using Bayesian Optimization than with random sampling.We also show how the algorithm convergence speed and accuracy is related to properties of the target variable, such as noisiness or dimensionality.We also give practical insights on how implementations of Bayesian optimization can be fine-tuned for different contexts.Specifically, we illustrate the trade-off between using a simple model for fast optimization and a complex model for higher target accuracy.We also address model complexity and computation time for multi-dimensional optimization.Overall, we show that Bayesian optimization is a suitable approach for closed-loop TMS experiments.We show different use-cases and illustrate which properties require modified implementations of the algorithm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain stimulationSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207