MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103508190 · doi:10.1002/mrm.20363

Assessing linear time‐invariance in human primary somatosensory cortex with BOLD fMRI using vibrotactile stimuli

2005· article· en· W2103508190 on OpenAlexafffund
Cathy Nangini, Bradley J. MacIntosh, Fred Tam, Richard Staines, Simon J. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSomatosensory systemStimulus (psychology)NeuroscienceSensory systemPsychologyTime perceptionPsychophysicsPerceptionCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The assumption of linear time-invariance (LTI) in the human primary somatosensory cortex (SI) is assessed for fMRI signals generated by variable-duration vibrotactile stimuli. Predictions based on time-shifted summation (TSS) of responses to 2 s stimuli overestimate observed BOLD signal amplitudes in response to longer-duration stimuli, in agreement with previous findings in other primary sensory cortices. To interpret these results, we undertook an alternative approach for LTI assessment by characterizing BOLD signals using two biophysical models. The first model assumes that the input stimulus envelope is proportional to neural activity. The second assumes that neural activity exhibits both transient and steady-state components, consistent with extensive electrophysiological data, and fits the experimental data better. Although nonlinearity remains evident for short stimulus durations, the latter model shows that the TSS procedure to assess LTI overestimates the BOLD signal because the temporal characteristics of neural activity have not been considered adequately. Further research to investigate the BOLD response to time-varying neural activity is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in MedicineSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207