Effects of Neural Synchrony on Surface EEG
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
It has long been assumed that the surface electroencephalography (EEG) signal depends on both the amplitude and spatial synchronization of underlying neural activity, though isolating their respective contribution remains elusive. To address this, we made simultaneous surface EEG measurements along with intracortical recordings of local field potentials (LFPs) in the primary visual cortex of behaving nonhuman primates. We found that trial-by-trial fluctuations in EEG power could be explained by a linear combination of LFP power and interelectrode temporal synchrony. This effect was observed in both stimulus and stimulus-free conditions and was particularly strong in the gamma range (30-100 Hz). Subsequently, we used pharmacological manipulations to show that neural synchrony can produce a positively modulated EEG signal even when the LFP signal is negatively modulated. Taken together, our results demonstrate that neural synchrony can modulate EEG signals independently of amplitude changes in neural activity. This finding has strong implications for the interpretation of EEG in basic and clinical research, and helps reconcile EEG response discrepancies observed in different modalities (e.g., EEG vs. functional magnetic resonance imaging) and different spatial scales (e.g., EEG vs. intracranial EEG).
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) | 0.000 | 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