MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888199448 · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01323

Error-related Persistence of Motor Activity in Resting-state Networks

2018· article· en· W2888199448 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolò F. Bernardi, Floris T. van Vugt, Ricardo Ruy Valle-Mena, Shahabeddin Vahdat, David J. Ostry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsPsychologyMotor learningNeurosciencePutamenSomatosensory systemCerebellumResting state fMRIPrimary motor cortexMotor cortexBrain activity and meditationElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between neural activation during movement training and the plastic changes that survive beyond movement execution is not well understood. Here we ask whether the changes in resting-state functional connectivity observed following motor learning overlap with the brain networks that track movement error during training. Human participants learned to trace an arched trajectory using a computer mouse in an MRI scanner. Motor performance was quantified on each trial as the maximum distance from the prescribed arc. During learning, two brain networks were observed, one showing increased activations for larger movement error, comprising the cerebellum, parietal, visual, somatosensory, and cortical motor areas, and the other being more activated for movements with lower error, comprising the ventral putamen and the OFC. After learning, changes in brain connectivity at rest were found predominantly in areas that had shown increased activation for larger error during task, specifically the cerebellum and its connections with motor, visual, and somatosensory cortex. The findings indicate that, although both errors and accurate movements are important during the active stage of motor learning, the changes in brain activity observed at rest primarily reflect networks that process errors. This suggests that error-related networks are represented in the initial stages of motor memory formation.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cognitive NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207