An event‐related potential study of supramodal attentional control and crossmodal attention effects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted two audiovisual experiments to determine whether event-related potential (ERP) components elicited by attention-directing cues reflect supramodal attentional control. Symbolic visual cues were used to direct attention prior to auditory targets in Experiment 1, and symbolic auditory cues were used to direct attention prior to visual targets in Experiment 2. Different patterns of cue ERPs were found in the two experiments. A frontal negativity called the ADAN was absent in Experiment 2, which indicates that this component does not reflect supramodal attentional control. A posterior positivity called the LDAP was observed in both experiments but was focused more posteriorly over the occipital scalp in Experiment 2. This component appears to reflect multiple processes, including visual processes involved in location marking and target preparation as well as supramodal processes involved in attentional control.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it