MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Detection of fMRI activation using Cortical Surface Mapping

2001· article· en· W1981591148 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlatteningSensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceFlexibility (engineering)Artificial intelligenceNeurosciencePattern recognition (psychology)PsychologyMathematicsPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A methodology for fMRI data analysis confined to the cortex, Cortical Surface Mapping (CSM), is presented. CSM retains the flexibility of the General Linear Model based estimation, but the procedures involved are adapted to operate on the cortical surface, while avoiding to resort to explicit flattening. The methodology is tested by means of simulations and application to a real fMRI protocol. The results are compared with those obtained with a standard, volume-oriented approach (SPM), and it is shown that CSM leads to local differences in sensitivity, with generally higher sensitivity for CSM in two of the three subjects studied. The discussion provided is focused on the benefits of the introduction of anatomical information in fMRI data analysis, and the relevance of CSM as a step toward this goal.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.203 · 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