MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118539921 · doi:10.1186/1471-2202-8-s2-s9

Invited talk: What can brain imaging add to neuronal and network representations of pain and attention?

2007· article· en· W2118539921 on OpenAlexaff
Karen D. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neuroscience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroimagingPerceptNeurosciencePsychologyPerceptionFunctional connectivityChronic painElectrophysiologyCognitive scienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classic electrophysiological studies laid the groundwork for our understanding of pain mechanisms and the impact of attentional factors. However, with the advent of neuroimaging technologies such as functional MRI, brain mechanism associated with the multidimensional aspects of human pain perception can now be mapped. Our lab is developing models of specific qualities (percept-related fMRI) of the pain experience, how they are impacted by attentional and individual factors in both healthy individuals and chronic pain states. Such models are also informed by single cell electrophysiological recordings in the human brain, and network models of pain and attention we are developing from multivariate analyses. This presentation will provide an overview of these studies.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.308
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

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NeuroscienceSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207