MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictive information and error processing: The role of medial‐frontal cortex during motor control

2007· article· en· W2073741335 on OpenAlex
Olav Krigolson, Clay B. Holroyd

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyFrontal cortexControl (management)Motor cortexNeuroscienceMotor controlFrontal lobeCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have recently provided evidence that an error-related negativity (ERN), an ERP component generated within medial-frontal cortex, is elicited by errors made during the performance of a continuous tracking task (O.E. Krigolson & C.B. Holroyd, 2006). In the present study we conducted two experiments to investigate the ability of the medial-frontal error system to evaluate predictive error information. In two experiments participants used a joystick to perform a computer-based continuous tracking task in which some tracking errors were inevitable. In both experiments, half of these errors were preceded by a predictive cue. The results of both experiments indicated that an ERN-like waveform was elicited by tracking errors. Furthermore, in both experiments the predicted error waveforms had an earlier peak latency than the unpredicted error waveforms. These results demonstrate that the medial-frontal error system can evaluate predictive error information.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.286 · 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