MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989191535 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00575

MEG studies of motor cortex gamma oscillations: evidence for a gamma “fingerprint” in the brain?

2013· article· en· W1989191535 on OpenAlexafffund
Douglas Cheyne, Paul Ferrari

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMental Health Research CanadaHospital for Sick Children
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceMotor cortexMagnetoencephalographyPsychologyCortex (anatomy)ElectroencephalographyStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human motor cortex exhibits transient bursts of high frequency gamma oscillations in the 60-90 Hz range during movement. It has been proposed that gamma oscillations generally reflect local intracortical activity. However, movement-evoked gamma is observed simultaneously in both cortical and subcortical (basal ganglia) structures and thus appears to reflect long-range cortical-subcortical interactions. Recent evidence suggests that gamma oscillations do not simply reflect sensory reafference, but have a facilitative role in movement initiation. Here we summarize contributions of MEG to our understanding of movement-evoked gamma oscillations, including evidence that transient gamma bursts during the performance of specific movements constitutes a stereotyped spectral and temporal pattern within individuals-a gamma "fingerprint"-that is highly stable over time. Although their functional significance remains to be fully understood, movement-evoked gamma oscillations may represent frequency specific tuning within cortical-subcortical networks that can be monitored non-invasively using MEG during a variety of motor tasks, and may provide important information regarding cortical dynamics of ongoing motor control.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations141
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207