MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184892288 · doi:10.3389/fnsys.2021.687393

Low-Resolution Neurocognitive Aging and Cognition: An Embodied Perspective

2021· article· en· W3184892288 on OpenAlexaff
Jordan Mille, Simona M. Brambati, Marie Izaute, Guillaume T. Vallet

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Systems Neuroscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundRégion Auvergne-Rhône-AlpesAgence Nationale de la RechercheEuropean Commission
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionCognitionNeurocognitivePsychologyCognitive psychologyPerceptionPerspective (graphical)Cognitive declineNeurophysiologyCognitive scienceNeuroscienceDementiaComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consistent with embodied cognition, a growing evidence in young adults show that sensorimotor processing is at the core of cognition. Considering that this approach predicts direct interaction between sensorimotor processing and cognition, embodied cognition may thus be particularly relevant to study aging, since this population is characterized by concomitant changes in sensorimotor and cognitive processing. The present perspective aims at showing the value and interest to explore normal aging throughout embodiment by focusing on the neurophysiological and cognitive changes occurring in aging. To this end, we report some of the neurophysiological substrates underpinning the perceptual and memory interactions in older adults, from the low and high perceptual processing to the conjunction in the medial temporal lobe. We then explore how these changes could explain more broadly the cognitive changes associated with aging in terms of losses and gains.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Systems NeuroscienceSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207