MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2532440736 · doi:10.1075/bct.47.16ste

The EEG/ERP technologies in linguistic research

2012· book-chapter· en· W2532440736 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBenjamins current topics · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyNeuroimagingComputer scienceBoomFunctional magnetic resonance imagingField (mathematics)PsychologyCognitive scienceNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of neuroimaging has experienced a tremendous boom due to technological advances in the last ten years and this is also reflected in the electroencephalography / event-related potentials (EEG/ERP) method. This contribution provides an overview of the main EEG/ERP hardware systems and software development currently on the market and the benefits of such technology for the study of language issues. We discuss the “added-value” such technology brings to the research of language and the possibilities of combining various neuroimaging techniques with emphasis on the integration of EEG/ERP and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Our contribution ends with a look at what we think may be the methodologies that drive the field forward in the not too distant future.

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 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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.221 · 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