MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622760875 · doi:10.1101/056440

Age-Related Delay in Visual and Auditory Evoked Responses is Mediated by White and Gray matter Differences

2016· preprint· en· W2622760875 on OpenAlexaff
Darren Price, Lorraine K. Tyler, Rafael Neto Henriques, K. Campbell, Nitin Williams, Maximilian Treder, Jason R. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
KeywordsWhite matterMagnetoencephalographyNeurosciencePsychologyAtrophyAudiologyGray (unit)Visual processingPopulationMagnetic resonance imagingElectroencephalographyPerceptionMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Slowing is a common feature of ageing, yet a direct relationship between neural slowing and brain atrophy is yet to be established in healthy humans. We combine magnetoencephalographic (MEG) measures of neural processing speed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures of white- and gray-matter in a large (N=617, 18-88yrs), population-derived cohort ( www.cam-can.org ) to investigate the relationship between age-related structural differences and VEF and AEF delay across two different tasks. Using a novel technique, we show that VEFs exhibit a constant delay, whereas AEPs exhibit delay that accumulates over time. Visual delay is mediated by white-matter microstructure in the optic radiation, presumably reflecting increased transmission time, whereas auditory delay is mediated by gray-matter differences in auditory cortex, presumably reflecting less efficient local processing. Our results demonstrate that age has dissociable effects on neural processing speed, and that these effects relate to different types of brain atrophy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207