Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mental chronometry encompasses all aspects of time processing in the nervous system and constitutes a standard tool in many disciplines including theoretical and experimental psychology and human neuroscience. Mental chronometry has represented a fundamental approach to elucidate the time course of many cognitive phenomena and their underlying neural circuits over more than a century. Nowadays, mental chronometry continues evolving and expanding our knowledge, and our understanding of the temporal organization of the brain in combination with different neuroscience techniques and advanced methods in mathematical analysis. In research on mental chronometry, human reaction/responses times (RT) play a central role. Together with RTs, other topics in mental chronometry include vocal, manual and saccadic latencies, subjective time, psychological time, interval timing, time perception, internal clock, time production, time representation, time discrimination, time illusion, temporal summation, temporal integration, temporal judgment, redundant signals effect, perceptual, decision and motor time, etc. It is worth noting that there have been well over 37,000 full-length journal papers published in the last decade on a variety of topics related to simple and choice RTs, etc. This amounts to approximately 3800 papers per year, or roughly 10 papers per day (source: PubMed, similarly Thomson Reuters Web of Science). There are comprehensive reviews that deal extensively with the history of mental chronometry, experimental methods and paradigms, stochastic models, etc. as well as its relationship to other psychological and physiological variables, neuroscience methods and clinical applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".