MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Are intrinsic neural timescales related to sensory processing? Evidence from abnormal behavioral states

2020· article· en· W3099900825 on OpenAlexafffund
Federico Zilio, Javier Gómez‐Pilar, Shumei Cao, Jun Zhang, Di Zang, Zengxin Qi, Jiaxing Tan, Tanigawa Hiromi, Xuehai Wu, Stuart Fogel, Zirui Huang, Matthias R. Hohmann, Tatiana Fomina, Matthis Synofzik, Moritz Grosse‐Wentrup, Adrian M. Owen, Georg Northoff

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaWestern University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China Stem Cell and Translational ResearchInstituto de Salud Carlos IIICanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHangzhou Normal UniversityMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y NanomedicinaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaCanada Research ChairsEuropean Regional Development FundEJLB FoundationEuropean CommissionHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeFederación Española de Enfermedades Raras
KeywordsSensory systemNeuroscienceSensory processingElectroencephalographyPsychologyNeural correlates of consciousnessWakefulnessAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The brain exhibits a complex temporal structure which translates into a hierarchy of distinct neural timescales. An open question is how these intrinsic timescales are related to sensory or motor information processing and whether these dynamics have common patterns in different behavioral states. We address these questions by investigating the brain's intrinsic timescales in healthy controls, motor (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, locked-in syndrome), sensory (anesthesia, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome), and progressive reduction of sensory processing (from awake states over N1, N2, N3). We employed a combination of measures from EEG resting-state data: auto-correlation window (ACW), power spectral density (PSD), and power-law exponent (PLE). Prolonged neural timescales accompanied by a shift towards slower frequencies were observed in the conditions with sensory deficits, but not in conditions with motor deficits. Our results establish that the spontaneous activity's intrinsic neural timescale is related to the neural capacity that specifically supports sensory rather than motor information processing in the healthy brain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations117
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207