MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Trail making and cognitive set-shifting

2000· article· en· W2127668182 on OpenAlexaff
RICARDO DE OLIVERA-SOUZA, Jorge Moll, Leigh J. Passman, Fernando Cimini R. Cunha, Flávia Paes, Marcus Vinicius Adriano, Fátima Azevedo Ignácio, Rogério Paysano Marrocos

Bibliographic record

VenueArquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrail Making TestCognitionPsychologyCognitive psychologySet (abstract data type)Adaptation (eye)Test (biology)Association (psychology)Measure (data warehouse)Developmental psychologyComputer scienceCognitive impairmentPsychiatryData miningPsychotherapistNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tested the hypothesis that Part B of the Trail Making Test (TMT) is a measure of cognitive set-shifting ability in 55 normal subjects with the conventional (written) TMT and a verbal adaptation, the "verbal TMT" (vTMT). The finding of a significant association between Parts B of TMT and vTMT (r = 0,59, p < 0,001), after correcting for age and education, supports the view that Part B of TMT is a valid measure of the ability to alternate between cognitive categories.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.306 · 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.

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

Citations57
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArquivos de Neuro-PsiquiatriaSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207