MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613193994 · doi:10.1037/cep0000132

Cognitive modeling as an interface between brain and behavior: Measuring the semantic decline in mild cognitive impairment.

2017· article· en· W2613193994 on OpenAlexafffund
Brendan T. Johns, Vanessa Taler, David B. Pisoni, Martin R. Farlow, Ann Marie Hake, David A. Kareken, Frederick W. Unverzagt, Michael N. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute on AgingAlzheimer Society
KeywordsVerbal fluency testPsychologyCognitive psychologySemantic memoryCognitionPsycINFOCognitive modelNeuropsychologyMEDLINENeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is characterised by subjective and objective memory impairment in the absence of dementia. MCI is a strong predictor for the development of Alzheimer's disease, and may represent an early stage in the disease course in many cases. A standard task used in the diagnosis of MCI is verbal fluency, where participants produce as many items from a specific category (e.g., animals) as possible. Verbal fluency performance is typically analysed by counting the number of items produced. However, analysis of the semantic path of the items produced can provide valuable additional information. We introduce a cognitive model that uses multiple types of lexical information in conjunction with a standard memory search process. The model used a semantic representation derived from a standard semantic space model in conjunction with a memory searching mechanism derived from the Luce choice rule (Luce, 1977). The model was able to detect differences in the memory searching process of patients who were developing MCI, suggesting that the formal analysis of verbal fluency data is a promising avenue to examine the underlying changes occurring in the development of cognitive impairment. (PsycINFO Database Record

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207