MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sleep State Influences Early Sound Encoding at Cortical But Not Subcortical Levels

2025· article· en· W4412075570 on OpenAlexafffund
Hugo R. Jourde, Emily B. J. Coffey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec
KeywordsAuditory cortexMagnetoencephalographyMemory consolidationNeuroscienceThalamusSleep (system call)PsychologySleep spindleAudiologyNon-rapid eye movement sleepEye movementElectroencephalographyMedicineComputer scienceHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In sleep, the brain balances protecting processes like memory consolidation with preserving responsiveness to significant external stimuli. Although reductions in higher-level auditory processes during deeper sleep have been described, the sleep-dependent changes across levels of auditory hierarchy, particularly as regards early sound representations, remain undefined. The frequency-following response (FFR) is an evoked auditory response that indexes neural encoding of sound periodicity. It is generated by neural populations in the brainstem, thalamus, and auditory cortex that phase-lock to periodic auditory stimuli and encode pitch information. The FFR's neural sources, which can be resolved using magnetoencephalography, allow evaluation of neural representation strength throughout the auditory neuraxis as a function of sleep state, as well as neural events like slow waves and sleep spindles that are hypothesized to attenuate acoustic processing as a means of preserving the sleep state. We recorded FFRs during a 2.5 h nap from 14 healthy male and female human adults to investigate how sleep depth and microarchitecture affect auditory encoding. We show that FFR strength is maintained across non-rapid eye movement sleep stages in subcortical nuclei, yet decreases in deeper sleep in the auditory cortex. FFR strength was not influenced by slow wave or spindle activity, but rather by reduced communication between the thalamus and cortex. This differentiation in sound representation across the auditory hierarchy suggests a means by which the brain might balance environmental monitoring with preserving critical restorative processes.

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: 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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207