MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conundrums of High-Frequency Oscillations (80–800 Hz) in the Epileptic Brain

2015· review· en· W872847797 on OpenAlexaff
Liset Menéndez de la Prida, Richard J. Staba, Joshua Dian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsNeuroscienceEpilepsyComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pathological high-frequency oscillations (HFOs) (80-800 Hz) are considered biomarkers of epileptogenic tissue, but the underlying complex neuronal events are not well understood. Here, we identify and discuss several outstanding issues or conundrums in regards to the recording, analysis, and interpretation of HFOs in the epileptic brain to critically highlight what is known and what is not about these enigmatic events. High-frequency oscillations reflect a range of neuronal processes contributing to overlapping frequencies from the lower 80 Hz to the very fast spectral frequency bands. Given their complex neuronal nature, HFOs are extremely sensitive to recording conditions and analytical approaches. We provide a list of recommendations that could help to obtain comparable HFO signals in clinical and basic epilepsy research. Adopting basic standards will facilitate data sharing and interpretation that collectively will aid in understanding the role of HFOs in health and disease for translational purpose.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations66
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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