EEG Power Spectrum Correlates of Working Memory in Children with Learning Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning disorders (LD) are diagnosed in children whose academic skills of reading, writing or mathematics are impaired and lagged according to their age, schooling and intelligence. Children with LD experience substantial working memory (WM) deficits, even more pronounced if more than one of the academic skills is affected. We compared the task-related EEG power spectral density of children with LD (n= 23), with a control group of children with good academic achievement (n= 22), during the performance of a WM task. sLoreta was used to estimate the current distribution at the sources, and 18 brain regions of interests (ROIs) were chosen with an extended version of the eigenvector centrality mapping technique. In this way, we lessen some drawbacks of the traditional EEG at the sensor space by an analysis at the brain sources level over data-driven selected ROIs. Results: The LD group showed fewer correct responses at the WM task, an overall slower EEG with more theta activity in all ROIs, less upper-alpha power at posterior areas, and less high-frequency beta activity in frontal areas. We explain these EEG patterns in LD children as indices of an inefficient neural resource management related with a delay in the neural development.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".