Phase‐Amplitude Coupling of NREM Sleep Oscillations Shows Between‐Night Stability and is Related to Overnight Memory Gains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is growing evidence in humans linking the temporal coupling between spindles and slow oscillations during NREM sleep with the overnight stabilization of memories encoded from daytime experiences in humans. However, whether the type and strength of learning influence that relationship is still unknown. Here we tested whether the amount or type of verbal word-pair learning prior to sleep affects subsequent phase-amplitude coupling (PAC) between spindles and slow oscillations (SO). We measured the strength and preferred timing of such coupling in the EEG of 41 healthy human participants over a post-learning and control night to compare intra-individual changes with inter-individual differences. We leveraged learning paradigms of varying word-pair (WP) load: 40 WP learned to a minimum criterion of 60% correct (n = 11); 40 WP presented twice (n = 15); 120 WP presented twice (n = 15). There were no significant differences in the preferred phase or strength between the control and post-learning nights, in all learning conditions. We observed an overnight consolidation effect (improved performance at delayed recall) for the criterion learning condition only, and only in this condition was the overnight change in memory performance significantly positively correlated with the phase of SO-spindle coupling. These results suggest that the coupling of brain oscillations during human NREM sleep is stable traits that are not modulated by the amount of pre-sleep learning, yet are implicated in the sleep-dependent consolidation of memory-especially when overnight gains in memory are observed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".