Methodological aspects of EEG and body dynamics measurements during motion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EEG involves the recording, analysis, and interpretation of voltages recorded on the human scalp which originate from brain gray matter. EEG is one of the most popular methods of studying and understanding the processes that underlie behavior. This is so, because EEG is relatively cheap, easy to wear, light weight and has high temporal resolution. In terms of behavior, this encompasses actions, such as movements that are performed in response to the environment. However, there are methodological difficulties which can occur when recording EEG during movement such as movement artifacts. Thus, most studies about the human brain have examined activations during static conditions. This article attempts to compile and describe relevant methodological solutions that emerged in order to measure body and brain dynamics during motion. These descriptions cover suggestions on how to avoid and reduce motion artifacts, hardware, software and techniques for synchronously recording EEG, EMG, kinematics, kinetics, and eye movements during motion. Additionally, we present various recording systems, EEG electrodes, caps and methods for determinating real/custom electrode positions. In the end we will conclude that it is possible to record and analyze synchronized brain and body dynamics related to movement or exercise tasks.
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 | 0.007 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".