MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041848290 · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17255-9

Brain meta-state transitions demarcate thoughts across task contexts exposing the mental noise of trait neuroticism

2020· article· en· W3041848290 on OpenAlexafffund
Julie Tseng, Jordan Poppenk

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthMcDonnell Center for Systems NeuroscienceGovernment of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's UniversityNIH Blueprint for Neuroscience ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCognitive psychologyTransition (genetics)TraitPsychologyNarrativePrior probabilityTask (project management)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers have observed large-scale neural meta-state transitions that align to narrative events during movie-viewing. However, group or training-derived priors have been needed to detect them. Here, we introduce methods to sample transitions without any priors. Transitions detected by our methods predict narrative events, are similar across task and rest, and are correlated with activation of regions associated with spontaneous thought. Based on the centrality of semantics to thought, we argue these transitions serve as general, implicit neurobiological markers of new thoughts, and that their frequency, which is stable across contexts, approximates participants' mentation rate. By enabling observation of idiosyncratic transitions, our approach supports many applications, including phenomenological access to the black box of resting cognition. To illustrate the utility of this access, we regress resting fMRI transition rate and movie-viewing transition conformity against trait neuroticism, thereby providing a first neural confirmation of mental noise theory.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations44
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207