MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594089532 · doi:10.1111/psyp.12850

Your brain on bikes: P3, MMN/N2b, and baseline noise while pedaling a stationary bike

2017· article· en· W2594089532 on OpenAlexafffund
Joanna E. M. Scanlon, Alex J. Sieben, Kevin R. Holyk, Kyle E. Mathewson

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectroencephalographyPsychologyNoise (video)Mismatch negativityAudiologyBaseline (sea)Brain activity and meditationOddball paradigmSittingEvent-related potentialComputer scienceNeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasingly, there is a trend to measure brain activity in more ecologically realistic scenarios. Normally, the confines of the laboratory and sedentary tasks mitigate sources of electrical noise on EEG measurement. Moving EEG outside of the lab requires understanding of the impact of complex movements and activities on traditional EEG and ERP measures. Here, we recorded EEG with active electrodes while participants were either riding or sitting on a stationary bike in an electrical and sound-attenuated chamber in the lab. Participants performed an auditory oddball task, pressing a button when they detected rare target tones in a series of standard frequent tones. We quantified both the levels of spectral, single-trial baseline, and ERP baseline noise, as well as classic MMN/N2b and P3 ERP components measured during both biking and sitting still. We observed slight increases in posterior high frequency noise in the spectra, and increased noise in the baseline period during biking. However, morphologically and topographically similar MMN/N2b and P3 components were measured reliably while both biking and sitting. A quantification of the power to reliably measure ERPs as a function of the number of trials revealed slight increases in the number of trials needed during biking to achieve the same level of power. Taken in sum, our results confirm that classic ERPs can be measured reliably during biking activities in the lab. Future directions will employ these techniques outside the lab in ecologically valid situations.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations37
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychophysiologySame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207