MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220833196 · doi:10.1038/s41537-022-00239-7

Does temporal irregularity drive prediction failure in schizophrenia? temporal modelling of ERPs

2022· article· en· W4220833196 on OpenAlex
Maria Karanikolaou, Jakub Limanowski, Georg Northoff

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

VenueSchizophrenia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean Commission
KeywordsN100ElectroencephalographyPsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Event-related potentialLatency (audio)AudiologyAuditory eventComputer scienceSpeech recognitionNeuroscienceCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schizophrenia subjects often suffer from a failure to properly predict incoming inputs; most notably, some patients exhibit impaired prediction of the sensory consequences of their own actions. The mechanisms underlying this deficit remain unclear, though. One possible mechanism could consist in aberrant predictive processing, as schizophrenic patients show relatively less attenuated neuronal activity to self-produced tones, than healthy controls. Here, we tested the hypothesis that this aberrant predictive mechanism would manifest itself in the temporal irregularity of neuronal signals. For that purpose, we here introduce an event-related potential (ERP) study model analysis that consists of an EEG real-time model equation, eeg(t) and a frequency Laplace transformed Transfer Function (TF) equation, eeg(s). Combining circuit analysis with control and cable theory, we estimate the temporal model representations of auditory ERPs to reveal neural mechanisms that make predictions about self-generated sensations. We use data from 49 schizophrenic patients (SZ) and 32 healthy control (HC) subjects in an auditory 'prediction' paradigm; i.e., who either pressed a button to deliver a sound tone (epoch a), or just heard the tone without button press (epoch b). Our results show significantly higher degrees of temporal irregularity or imprecision between different trials of the ERP from the Cz electrode (N100, P200) in SZ compared to HC (Levene's test, p < 0.0001) as indexed by altered latency, lower similarity/correlation of single trial time courses (using dynamic time warping), and longer settling times to reach steady state in the intertrial interval. Using machine learning, SZ vs HC could be highly accurately classified (92%) based on the temporal parameters of their ERPs' TF models, using as features the poles of the TF rational functions. Together, our findings show temporal irregularity or imprecision between single trials to be abnormally increased in SZ. This may indicate a general impairment of SZ, related to precisely predicting the sensory consequences of one's actions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.203 · 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