Frontal midline theta and <scp>N</scp>200 amplitude reflect complementary information about expectancy and outcome evaluation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feedback ERN (fERN) and frontal midline theta have both been proposed to index a dopamine-like reinforcement learning signal in anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). We investigated these proposals by comparing fERN amplitude and theta power with respect to their sensitivities to outcome valence and probability in a previously collected EEG dataset. Bayesian model comparison revealed a dissociation between the two measures, with fERN amplitude mainly sensitive to valence and theta power mainly sensitive to probability. Further, fERN amplitude was highly correlated with the portion of theta power that is consistent in phase across trials (i.e., evoked theta power). These results suggest that although both measures provide valuable information about cognitive function of frontal midline cortex, fERN amplitude is specifically sensitive to dopamine reinforcement learning signals whereas theta power reflects the ACC response to unexpected events.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it