MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Sleep, Neurocognitive Function, Learning, and Memory

2025· book-chapter· en· W4410617711 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Baena, Pozzobon Alyssa, Joel Hordijk, L. Bryan Ray, Stuart Fogel

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveSleep (system call)PsychologyCognitive psychologyFunction (biology)Cognitive scienceNeuroscienceComputer scienceCognitionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sleep has been shown to play a central role in the optimal consolidation of memory and maintenance of neurocognitive function. This chapter first provides a comprehensive review of the various sleep-specific electrophysiological markers related to learning and memory consolidation. Second, accumulating evidence for the role of sleep in declarative memory consolidation will be discussed, differentiating between the contribution of slow wave–spindle–ripple coupling during non-rapid-eye-movement (NREM) sleep and the specific contribution of rapid-eye-movement (REM) sleep in memory consolidation. Third, the authors explore the contribution of sleep in cognitively simple motor procedural memories, suggesting that NREM sleep and, critically, sleep spindles play a central role in this process. Finally, the specific case of cognitively complex procedural memory consolidation will be considered, suggesting that, as compared to the case of simple procedural memories, REM sleep may be involved when the task demands are more challenging and cognitively complex (e.g., new rules, novel strategies, problem-solving skills), whereas spindles are involved when the task requires well-established skills (e.g., cognitively simple motor skills).

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.005

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueOxford University Press eBooks→Same topicSleep and Wakefulness Research→French-language works237,207→