Thalamic feedback shapes brain responses evoked by cortical stimulation in mice and humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cortical stimulation with single pulses is a common technique in clinical practice and research. However, we still do not understand the extent to which it engages subcortical circuits that may contribute to the associated evoked potentials (EPs). Here we show that cortical stimulation generates remarkably similar EPs in humans and mice, with a late component similarly modulated by the state of the targeted cortico-thalamic network. We then optogenetically dissect the underlying circuit in mice, demonstrating that the EPs late component is caused by a thalamic hyperpolarization and rebound. The magnitude of this late component correlates with bursting frequency and synchronicity of thalamic neurons, modulated by the subject’s behavioral state. A simulation of the thalamo-cortical circuit highlights that both intrinsic thalamic currents as well as cortical and thalamic GABAergic neurons contribute to this response profile. We conclude that single pulse cortical stimulation engages cortico-thalamo-cortical circuits largely preserved across different species and stimulation modalities. Neural mechanisms underlying thalamic contributions to evoked potentials by brain stimulation, which has been widely used for therapeutic interventions, are not fully understood. In this translational study the authors show that the thalamus plays a critical role in shaping its neural responses across species and across stimulation modalities.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".