MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007319466 · doi:10.3390/brainsci10020124

Evaluating Preschool Visual Attentional Selective-Set: Preliminary ERP Modeling and Simulation of Target Enhancement Homology

2020· article· en· W3007319466 on OpenAlexaff
Amedeo D’Angiulli, Dao Anh Thu Pham, Gerry Leisman, Gary S. Goldfield

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of OttawaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveWorking memoryFunctional magnetic resonance imagingPsychologyBrain mappingSet (abstract data type)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceCognitionNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We reanalyzed, modeled and simulated Event-Related Potential (ERP) data from 13 healthy children (Mean age = 5.12, Standard Deviation = 0.75) during a computerized visual sustained target detection task. Extending an ERP-based ACT–R (Adaptive Control of Thought–Rational) neurocognitive modeling approach, we tested whether visual sustained selective-set attention in preschool children involves the enhancement of neural response to targets, and it shows key adult-like features (neurofunctional homology). Blinded automatic peaks analysis was conducted on vincentized binned grand ERP averages. Time-course and distribution of scalp activity were detailed through topographic mapping and paths analysis. Reaction times and accuracy were also measured. Adult Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based mapping using ACT–R dipole source modeling and electric-field spiking simulation provided very good fit with the actual ERP data (R2 > 0.70). In most electrodes, between 50 and 400 ms, ERPs concurrent with target presentation were enhanced relative to distractor, without manual response confounds. Triangulation of peak analysis, ACT–R modeling and simulation for the entire ERP epochs up to the moment of manual response (~700 ms, on average) suggested converging evidence of distinct but interacting processes of enhancement and planning for response release/inhibition, respectively. The latter involved functions and structures consistent with adult ERP activity which might correspond to a large-scale network, implicating Dorsal and Ventral Attentional Networks, corticostriatal loops, and subcortical hubs connected to prefrontal cortex top-down working memory executive control. Although preliminary, the present approach suggests novel directions for further tests and falsifiable hypotheses on the origins and development of visual selective attention and their ERP correlates.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

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 head0.331
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain SciencesSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207