MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dorsal Medial Prefrontal Cortex Plays a Necessary Role in Rapid Error Prediction in Humans

2008· article· en· W2109687778 on OpenAlexafffund
Mandana Modirrousta, Lesley K. Fellows

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchKillam TrustsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsAnterior cingulate cortexMean squared prediction errorError-related negativityPrefrontal cortexDorsumNeurosciencePsychologyError detection and correctionCognitionComputer scienceMedicineMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Activity in human dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) is correlated with errors, near-misses, and response conflict. Based on these observations, this region has been cast as playing a central role in models of error processing, conflict monitoring, and cognitive control. However, clear evidence that this region of the brain is necessary for these processes has been elusive. We studied the effects of damage to this region on four different error-related measures in five patients, and 19 healthy participants. Most error-related indices were not affected by such damage: patients had intact post-error slowing, and were able to report and to correct errors after they were made with accuracies comparable with the control group. However, all five patients were notably slow to correct errors, suggesting a deficit in on-line error prediction. This slowing was associated with impairment in the conscious prediction of error likelihood before a response. This finding constitutes important converging evidence for a critical role for human dACC in error monitoring, and sheds light on the selectivity and timing of the error-related process affected by dACC damage.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations126
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207