Cortical Effects of Noisy Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation Using Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation (nGVS) can improve different motor, sensory, and cognitive behaviors. However, it is unclear how this stimulation affects brain activity to facilitate these improvements. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) is inexpensive, portable, and less prone to motion artifacts than other neuroimaging technology. Thus, fNIRS has the potential to provide insight into how nGVS affects cortical activity during a variety of natural behaviors. Here we sought to: (1) determine if fNIRS can detect cortical changes in oxygenated (HbO) and deoxygenated (HbR) hemoglobin with application of subthreshold nGVS, and (2) determine how subthreshold nGVS affects this fNIRS-derived hemodynamic response. A total of twelve healthy participants received nGVS and sham stimulation during a seated, resting-state paradigm. To determine whether nGVS altered activity in select cortical regions of interest (BA40, BA39), we compared differences between nGVS and sham HbO and HbR concentrations. We found a greater HbR response during nGVS compared to sham stimulation in left BA40, a region previously associated with vestibular processing, and with all left hemisphere channels combined (p < 0.05). We did not detect differences in HbO responses for any region during nGVS (p > 0.05). Our results suggest that fNIRS may be suitable for understanding the cortical effects of nGVS.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".