The evolution of the electroencephalographic response evoked by transformational apparent motion with age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine how the visual evoked responses associated to Transformational apparent motion (TAM) develop in a normal population. Fifty human observers, ranging from 3 to 27 years of age, passively viewed a high contrast sinusoidal concentric grating (spatial frequency: 0.8 c/deg; size: 10 deg2), followed by the same grating, radially modulated in amplitude so as to produce a star looking stimulus. The successive presentations of these two stimuli resulted in a TAM (Tse, Cavanagh & Nakayama, 1998). This TAM was presented 50 to 150 times during which the EEG was recorded. The results show a P100-N170-P230 complex at various occipito-temporal electrodes. The topography of this visual evoked potential complex changes considerably with age. In particular, the latencies between the peaks of the components correlate negatively with age, reaching a ceiling at around 14 years of age. As a whole, these results indicate that neural processing of TAM varies from birth to adulthood and that the perceptual maturation of the motion visual system is not complete before adolescence. We offer an explanation in terms of the stabilisation of synaptic density in the various visual areas (Zemon et al., 1997).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".