A Long-Range Fronto-Parietal 5- to 10-Hz Network Predicts "Top-Down" Controlled Guidance in a Task-Switch Paradigm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The capacity to rapidly adjust behavioral strategies according to changing task demands is closely associated with coordinated activity in lateral and medial prefrontal cortices. Subdivisions within prefrontal cortex are implicated to encode attentional task sets and to update changing task rules, particularly when changing task demands require top-down control. Here, we tested whether these top-down processes precede stimulus processing and constitute a preparatory attentional state that functionally couples with parietal cortex. We examined this functional coupling by recording from intracranial EEG electrodes in macaques during performance of a task-switching paradigm that separates task performance that is based on controlled top-down guidance from automatic, stimulus-triggered processing modes. We identify a prefrontal-parietal network that phase synchronizes at 5-10 Hz, particularly during preparatory states that indicate top-down controlled task-processing modes. Phase relations in the network suggest that medial and lateral prefrontal cortices synchronize bidirectionally, with medial prefrontal cortex showing a phase-lead relative to left parietal recorded 5- to 10-Hz preparatory signals. These findings reveal a 5- to 10-Hz coordinated, long-range fronto-parietal network prior to actual task-relevant stimulus processing, particularly when subjects engage in controlled task processing modes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".