Research on Children's Recognition Potential Evoked by Chinese Character Stimulus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the feature of Recognition Potential(RP)for eight-year healthy children which is evoked by Chinese character stimulus. Methods: We examined 53 eight-year healthy children with Canadian Stellate Systems 32 Channels Digital EEG and three stimulus of Chinese characters, Korean words, confused Chinese characters, with two patterns(Routine and Fast-flow pattern). While the stimulus information is sent to participants ,EEG is recorded simultaneously. RP and event related potentials(P300) are extracted from EEG and analyzed. Results: The latency of RP is earlier than that of P300 for three stimulus. The latency of the Chinese character is the shortest of all, and the latency of confused Chinese characters is longer than that of Korean words. As for two stimulating patterns, there is no difference between Routine and Fast-flow pattern. RP of Chinese character stimulus is most significant at scalp dipole of supra-occiput and sub- occiput than that of others. Conclusion: RP and P300 could be useful for assessing the development of healthy children's cognitive function, especially for some disabilities, such as poor-reading disorder and disturbed maturation of language.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".