MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784523794

Detection of Consciously Controlled Motor Cortical Activation by Near Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS)

2007· article· en· W2784523794 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Kohlenberg, Tom Chau

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotor cortexFunctional near-infrared spectroscopySIGNAL (programming language)Haemodynamic responsePrimary motor cortexNeuroscienceAnticipation (artificial intelligence)Cortex (anatomy)Nuclear magnetic resonancePsychologyPrefrontal cortexMedicineArtificial intelligencePhysicsComputer scienceInternal medicineCognitionStimulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Custom headgear was developed and fabricated for the purposes of detecting the hemodynamic response in the motor cortex of the human brain by near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). We present here, results from this NIRS study. Light in the NIR region was incident upon the human motor cortex in anticipation of observing differences in the absorption curves for recordings of periodic motor activation with respect to periods of rest. Frequency domain NIRS was used to obtain the properties of the NIR signal after the light waves had traversed the brain tissue. Analysis of the intensity of the signal reveals that the absorptive properties of the tissue are altered during periods of activation. T en neurologically healthy individuals each performed both a resting and a motor cortical activation task. We examined the shape of the average time domain curve for each of the two tasks and observe distinct differences; therefore, we anticipate that feature differences between these two curves will consistently discriminate between activation task and baseline responses. In particular, we examined the distribution of the peak-to-peak ranges, inter-peak times, the slopes of the average curves, and the magnitude of the extrema with respect to the mean value. These feature differences may be harnessed to discern a binary signal, thereby demonstrating the hemodynamic signal’s potential as an access pathway enabling individuals with severe motor disability.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMBES ProceedingsSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207