MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194802805 · doi:10.3390/brainsci11081102

A Bayesian Mixture Modelling of Stop Signal Reaction Time Distributions: The Second Contextual Solution for the Problem of Aftereffects of Inhibition on SSRT Estimations

2021· article· en· W3194802805 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohsen Soltanifar, Michael Escobar, Annie Dupuis, Russell Schachar

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsBayesian probabilityParametric statisticsMathematicsUnobservableNonparametric statisticsMixture modelStatisticsEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distribution of single Stop Signal Reaction Times (SSRT) in the stop signal task (SST) has been modelled with two general methods: a nonparametric method by Hans Colonius (1990) and a Bayesian parametric method by Dora Matzke, Gordon Logan and colleagues (2013). These methods assume an equal impact of the preceding trial type (go/stop) in the SST trials on the SSRT distributional estimation without addressing the relaxed assumption. This study presents the required model by considering a two-state mixture model for the SSRT distribution. It then compares the Bayesian parametric single SSRT and mixture SSRT distributions in the usual stochastic order at the individual and the population level under ex-Gaussian (ExG) distributional format. It shows that compared to a single SSRT distribution, the mixture SSRT distribution is more varied, more positively skewed, more leptokurtic and larger in stochastic order. The size of the results' disparities also depends on the choice of weights in the mixture SSRT distribution. This study confirms that mixture SSRT indices as a constant or distribution are significantly larger than their single SSRT counterparts in the related order. This result offers a vital improvement in the SSRT estimations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain SciencesSame topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207