MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789034055 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-19707-1

Detection of time-, frequency- and direction-resolved communication within brain networks

2018· article· en· W2789034055 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Barry Crouch, Linda Sommerlade, Peter Veselcic, Gernot Riedel, Björn Schelter, Bettina Platt

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlzheimer SocietyAlzheimer's Society
KeywordsElectroencephalographyComputer scienceAutoregressive modelArtificial intelligenceFast Fourier transformTime–frequency analysisInferencePattern recognition (psychology)Speech recognitionNeurosciencePsychologyAlgorithmMathematicsComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electroencephalography (EEG) records fast-changing neuronal signalling and communication and thus can offer a deep understanding of cognitive processes. However, traditional data analyses which employ the Fast-Fourier Transform (FFT) have been of limited use as they do not allow time- and frequency-resolved tracking of brain activity and detection of directional connectivity. Here, we applied advanced qEEG tools using autoregressive (AR) modelling, alongside traditional approaches, to murine data sets from common research scenarios: (a) the effect of age on resting EEG; (b) drug actions on non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep EEG (pharmaco-EEG); and (c) dynamic EEG profiles during correct vs incorrect spontaneous alternation responses in the Y-maze. AR analyses of short data strips reliably detected age- and drug-induced spectral EEG changes, while renormalized partial directed coherence (rPDC) reported direction- and time-resolved connectivity dynamics in mice. Our approach allows for the first time inference of behaviour- and stage-dependent data in a time- and frequency-resolved manner, and offers insights into brain networks that underlie working memory processing beyond what can be achieved with traditional methods.

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)0.001
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207