MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W55364487 · doi:10.1093/sleep/23.1.1g

The Roles of Vertex Sharp Waves and K-Complexes in the Generation of N300 in Auditory and Respiratory-related Evoked Potentials During Early Stage 2 NREM Sleep

2000· article· en· W55364487 on OpenAlexaff
Ian M. Colrain, Kate E. Webster, Giles Hirst, Kenneth B. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalpAudiologyVertex (graph theory)Stimulus (psychology)PhysicsPsychologyMedicineMathematicsAnatomyCognitive psychologyCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the scalp topography of the N300 response to stimuli of different modalities and to investigate the relationship of the N300 component to K-complexes and vertex sharp waves seen in the un-averaged EEG. DESIGN: Two experiments were conducted one using auditory; the other using respiratory occlusion stimuli presented during stage 2 sleep. Trials were classified on the basis of whether they produced a K-complex, a vertex sharp wave, or some other response. Auditory stimuli were presented in the form of an oddball paradigm, and averaged separately depending on whether they were "frequent" or "rare". In both experiments, responses were averaged separately based on the appearance of K-complexes, vertex sharps waves, or some "other" response to the stimuli. SETTING: Data were collected in the Melbourne University Sleep Laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Young healthy male adults, eight in experiment 1 and six in experiment 2. INTERVENTIONS: NA. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Data were collected from 29 scalp sites. In all cases, N300 amplitude was maximal in the vertex sharp wave averages, despite being clearly present in the averages of K-complexes and "other" responses. The vertex maximal scalp topography of the N300 did not differ across response conditions or as a function of stimulus modality. This is consistent with the N300 being produced by the same intracranial generators in all cases. There were no effects of stimulus or response type on N300 latency. CONCLUSIONS: N300 should be viewed as a multi-modal component with a different underlying generator mechanism than that of the K-complex.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations64
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207