Does the electrode amplification style matter? A comparison of active and passive EEG system configurations during standing and walking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been stated that active-transmission electrodes should improve signal quality in mobile EEG recordings. However, few studies have directly compared active- and passive-transmission electrodes during a mobile task. In this repeated measurement study, we investigated the performance of active and passive signal transmission electrodes with the same amplifier system in their respective typical configurations, during a mobile auditory task. The task was an auditory discrimination (1,000 vs. 800 Hz; counterbalanced) oddball task using approximately 560 trials (15% targets) for each condition. Eighteen participants performed the auditory oddball task both while standing and walking in an outdoor environment. While walking, there was a significant decrease in P3 amplitude, post-trial rejection trial numbers, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). No significant differences were found in signal quality between the two electrode configurations. SNR and P3 amplitude were test-retest reliable between recordings. We conclude that adequate use of a passive EEG electrode system achieves signal quality equivalent to that of an active system during a mobile task.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".