MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152217433 · doi:10.2466/pms.2002.95.2.531

Enhancement of Images of Possible Memories of Others during Exposure to Circumcerebral Magnetic Fields: Correlations with Ambient Geomagnetic Activity

2002· article· en· W2152217433 on OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Persinger, Charles M. Cook, S. G. Tiller

Bibliographic record

VenuePerceptual and Motor Skills · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarth's magnetic fieldPsychologyMagnetic fieldNuclear magnetic resonancePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the basis of results from a special subject who reported information at a distance during exposure to weak, circumcerebral magnetic fields rotating within the horizontal plane, we designed an experiment to discern if the subjective narratives of normal people exposed to these fields could be similar to the comments of emotionally related individuals who were concurrently generating shared memories about a randomly selected stimulus. Blind matching of the comments indicated that the proportions of 44 students who accurately paired the narratives of the field-exposed subject and the comments of the stimulus person as congruent were statistically significant for 5 of the 7 pairs whose narratives were of sufficient length for analysis. The ratings for congruence of the pairs of verbal behaviors for the 7 pairs of subjects were negatively correlated (rho = -.72) with the geomagnetic activity during the 24-hr. interval within which the experiences were conducted. The results suggested consciousness might also be an insulator to myriad stimuli which might be accessible when brain activity is modified by circumcerebral magnetic fields with temporal configurations in the order of 20 msec.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptual and Motor SkillsSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207