MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014773891 · doi:10.1002/mrm.20839

Exploratory data analysis reveals visuovisual interhemispheric transfer in functional magnetic resonance imaging

2006· article· en· W2014773891 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan C.N. D’Arcy, Andrew Cris Hamilton, Mark Jarmasz, Sara Sullivan, G. Stroink

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Institute for BiodiagnosticsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorpus callosumFunctional magnetic resonance imagingVisual fieldSpleniumPsychologyNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingWhite matter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used an exploratory data analysis approach to detect interhemispheric processing of complex visual stimuli in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). A crossed-uncrossed visual field paradigm was used to elicit interhemispheric transfer of picture/word information. Under the uncrossed (control) condition, the stimuli were presented to the preferential hemispheres (pictures to the left visual field/right hemisphere and words to the right visual field/left hemisphere). Under the crossed condition, the visual field presentation was switched in order to elicit increased interhemispheric processing. Fuzzy cluster analysis revealed significantly more crossed activity in cortical areas near the splenium of the corpus callosum. As expected, examination of the activation revealed smaller responses in perisplenial regions (relative to visual responses in the medial extrastriate regions). The exploratory results were compared with those obtained from parametric and masked analyses. The findings confirm that fMRI can be used to detect interhemispheric transfer of picture/word information. The activation was optimally characterized using exploratory data analysis.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations53
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207