Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation as an Investigative Tool in the Study of Visual Function
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
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a novel and powerful probe to study the relationship between human brain function and behavior. TMS is being widely used to investigate memory, language, attention, learning, and motor function and is even being utilized therapeutically in the treatment of depression. Some of the earliest applications of TMS have been directed toward the investigation of human visual perception. For example, a strong TMS pulse delivered to the occipital cortex in a sighted or even blind individual can evoke the sensation of perceiving light (visual phosphenes). TMS can also be used to suppress visual perception and investigate the timing of visual information processing. Furthermore, the functional connectivity between different brain areas can be mapped using TMS, thus establishing a causal link between visual cortical function and visual perception. The present article is meant as an overview of the technique of TMS and a review of the literature as it pertains to the study of visual function. The application of TMS in the diagnosis as well as possible therapeutic use in various visual disorders is also discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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