MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120244066 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhl159

Task-Related Modulation of Early Cortical Responses during Language Production: An Event-Related Synthetic Aperture Magnetometry Study

2007· article· en· W2120244066 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony T. Herdman, Elizabeth W. Pang, Volker Ressel, William Gaetz, Douglas Cheyne

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetoencephalographyPsychologySensory systemFunctional magnetic resonance imagingBrain activity and meditationStimulus (psychology)AudiologyPremotor cortexNeurosciencePerceptionCognitive psychologyElectroencephalographyDorsumMedicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used whole-head magnetoencephalography measurements to investigate the spatiotemporal pattern of neural activity related to language production. Eight participants overtly responded by repeating aloud or vocalizing an internally generated verb to auditorily or visually presented nouns. Activity peaked within primary sensory (auditory or visual) cortices between 75 and 130 ms after stimulus onset, association cortices (inferior and superior temporal gyri) between 130 and 170 ms, and inferior frontal and premotor areas between 150 and 240 ms. Common to auditory and visual modalities, peak activity at about 220 ms was significantly larger in bilateral inferior frontal and left precentral regions when participants generated a verb than when they repeated a noun. These early differences in frontal regions may reflect the allocation of resources to the processing of low-level perceptions that are projected to the premotor areas early in the preparation of language production.

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)0.001
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 score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations26
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207