MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074365572 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057217

Exploring Age-Related Changes in Dynamical Non-Stationarity in Electroencephalographic Signals during Early Adolescence

2013· article· en· W2074365572 on OpenAlexaff
Vasily A. Vakorin, Anthony R. McIntosh, Bratislav Mišić, Olga Krakovska, Catherine Poulsen, Kristina Martinu, Tomáš Paus

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalUniversity of TorontoMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill UniversityYork UniversityBaycrest Hospital
FundersJames S. McDonnell Foundation
KeywordsElectroencephalographySIGNAL (programming language)Brain activity and meditationDynamical systems theoryStatistical physicsAge groupsPhysicsPsychologyPattern recognition (psychology)NeuroscienceMathematicsComputer scienceCognitive psychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamics of brain signals such as electroencephalogram (EEG) can be characterized as a sequence of quasi-stable patterns. Such patterns in the brain signals can be associated with coordinated neural oscillations, which can be modeled by non-linear systems. Further, these patterns can be quantified through dynamical non-stationarity based on detection of qualitative changes in the state of the systems underlying the observed brain signals. This study explored age-related changes in dynamical non-stationarity of the brain signals recorded at rest, longitudinally with 128-channel EEG during early adolescence (10 to 13 years of age, 56 participants). Dynamical non-stationarity was analyzed based on segmentation of the time series with subsequent grouping of the segments into clusters with similar dynamics. Age-related changes in dynamical non-stationarity were described in terms of the number of stationary states and the duration of the stationary segments. We found that the EEG signal became more non-stationary with age. Specifically, the number of states increased whereas the mean duration of the stationary segment decreased with age. These two effects had global and parieto-occipital distribution, respectively, with the later effect being most dominant in the alpha (around 10 Hz) frequency band.

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)0.000
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 score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.142 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207