Claims

Closed-loop TMR timed to the slow-oscillation up-state improves memory consolidation relative to down-state cueing, though direct up-vs-down comparisons yield mixed results

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? In one large-stimulus study, up-state cueing reduced overnight forgetting compared to down-state cueing. → Julia Carbone & Susanne Diekelmann 2024 q2 i? Two studies found no memory difference between up-state and down-state cueing. → Julia Carbone & Susanne Diekelmann 2024 (2)

Evidence

Julia Carbone & Susanne Diekelmann 2024

Julia Carbone & Susanne Diekelmann. (2024). An update on recent advances in targeted memory reactivation during sleep. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00244-8

q2 · i? · causal · r?

The review attributes to Ngo and Staresina a closed-loop study cueing 120 verb-image-sound associations during SO up-states or down-states in NREM sleep. "reduced overnight forgetting when cueing occurred during the SO up-state compared to the down-state"; no effect size printed.

"Using this protocol, behavioral results revealed reduced overnight forgetting when cueing occurred during the SO up-state compared to the down-state (Fig. 2a)."

Julia Carbone & Susanne Diekelmann 2024 (2)

Julia Carbone & Susanne Diekelmann. (2024). An update on recent advances in targeted memory reactivation during sleep. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00244-8

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review reports that in Wang and colleagues' word-pair closed-loop study, "No differences were found in memory performance betweenup-state and down-state cueing", and likewise Göldi et al. found no up-state superiority over down-state directly; equivalence was not established.

"No differences were found in memory performance betweenup-state and down-state cueing."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id closed-loop-tmr-so-up-state-timing
title Closed-loop TMR timed to the slow-oscillation up-state improves memory consolidation relative to down-state cueing, though direct up-vs-down comparisons yield mixed results
description Closed-loop TMR timed to the slow-oscillation up-state improves memory consolidation relative to down-state cueing, though direct up-vs-down comparisons yield mixed results
status review
evidence_strength mixed
newest_evidence 2024
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — julia-carbone-susanne-diekelmann-2024, julia-carbone-susanne-diekelmann-2024-2

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.