MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210413431 · doi:10.3390/vision5040052

Aura Mapping: Where Vision and Somatosensation Meet

2021· article· en· W3210413431 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueVision · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsAuraSomatosensory systemCortical spreading depressionMigraineMigraine with auraNeurosciencePsychologyLateralitySensory systemAudiologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While migraine auras are most frequently visual, somatosensory auras are also relatively common. Both are characterized by the spread of activation across a cortical region containing a spatial mapping of the sensory (retinal or skin) surface. When both aura types occur within a single migraine episode, they may offer an insight into the neural mechanism which underlies them. Could they both be initiated by a single neural event, or do the timing and laterality relationships between them demand multiple triggers? The observations reported here were carried out 25 years ago by a group of six individuals with migraine with aura. They timed, described and mapped their visual and somatosensory auras as they were in progress. Twenty-nine episode reports are summarized here. The temporal relationship between the onset of the two auras was quite variable within and across participants. Various forms of the cortical spreading depression hypothesis of migraine aura are evaluated in terms of whether they can account for the timing, pattern of symptom spread and laterality of the recorded auras.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.290 · 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