MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319383072 · doi:10.1097/wnr.0b013e328357288e

Dynamics of oscillatory changes associated with the perception of human motion

2012· article· en· W2319383072 on OpenAlexafffund
Naznin Virji‐Babul, Alexander A. Moiseev, Wenqi Sun, Arman Fesharaki, Mirza Faisal Beg, Urs Ribary

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityDown Syndrome Research FoundationUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDynamics (music)PerceptionMotion (physics)NeurosciencePsychologyMotion perceptionCommunicationPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurophysiological evidence suggests that a specialized cortical network is involved in the visual perception of biological motion; however, the temporal dynamics underlying this network is largely unexplored. We used magnetoencephalography to determine the spatial distribution and task-related temporal dynamics of the oscillatory activity of random and human motion. We recorded cortical responses in healthy adults while they passively viewed point-light displays of static dots, random, and human motion. By analyzing differences in the time-frequency distributions between pairs of conditions, we found that: (a) the perception of both motion conditions resulted in a significant decrease in the α/β band in the right superior occipital gyrus and a significant decrease in the β band in the right insula and (b) the human motion condition was associated with specific alterations in α, β, and γ bands with significant reductions in the α band in the right superior temporal gyrus, right precuneus, and left inferior parietal lobule, significant reductions in the β band in the bilateral superior temporal gyrus, together with a significant increase in the γ band in the left inferior parietal lobule and superior temporal regions. These data suggest that although the perception of both random and human motion involves desynchronization of oscillatory activity in α and β bands in similar cortical regions, only human motion is associated with a larger network and significant alterations in the α/β band particularly in the right hemisphere.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.309
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 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207