MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Good scientific practice in EEG and MEG research: Progress and perspectives

2022· article· en· W4220935930 on OpenAlexafffund
Guiomar Niso, Laurens R. Krol, Etienne Combrisson, Anne‐Sophie Dubarry, Madison Elliott, François Clément, Yseult Héjja‐Brichard, Sophie K. Herbst, Karim Jerbi, Vanja Ković, Katia Lehongre, Steven J. Luck, Manuel Mercier, John C. Mosher, Yuri G. Pavlov, Aina Puce, Antonio Schettino, Daniele Schön, Walter Sinnott‐Armstrong, Bertille Somon, Аnđela Šoškić, Suzy J Styles, Roni Tibon, Martina G. Vilas, Marijn van Vliet, Maximilien Chaumon

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstituteUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of British ColumbiaGoogle (Canada)Okanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringUniversity of British ColumbiaNational Institute of Mental HealthAXA Research FundJohn Templeton FoundationErasmus Universiteit RotterdamRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Institutes of HealthBritish AcademyAlan Turing Institute
KeywordsScrutinyCompetence (human resources)Engineering ethicsComputer scienceWork (physics)Data sciencePsychologyKnowledge managementPublic relationsPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Good scientific practice (GSP) refers to both explicit and implicit rules, recommendations, and guidelines that help scientists to produce work that is of the highest quality at any given time, and to efficiently share that work with the community for further scrutiny or utilization. For experimental research using magneto- and electroencephalography (MEEG), GSP includes specific standards and guidelines for technical competence, which are periodically updated and adapted to new findings. However, GSP also needs to be regularly revisited in a broader light. At the LiveMEEG 2020 conference, a reflection on GSP was fostered that included explicitly documented guidelines and technical advances, but also emphasized intangible GSP: a general awareness of personal, organizational, and societal realities and how they can influence MEEG research. This article provides an extensive report on most of the LiveMEEG contributions and new literature, with the additional aim to synthesize ongoing cultural changes in GSP. It first covers GSP with respect to cognitive biases and logical fallacies, pre-registration as a tool to avoid those and other early pitfalls, and a number of resources to enable collaborative and reproducible research as a general approach to minimize misconceptions. Second, it covers GSP with respect to data acquisition, analysis, reporting, and sharing, including new tools and frameworks to support collaborative work. Finally, GSP is considered in light of ethical implications of MEEG research and the resulting responsibility that scientists have to engage with societal challenges. Considering among other things the benefits of peer review and open access at all stages, the need to coordinate larger international projects, the complexity of MEEG subject matter, and today's prioritization of fairness, privacy, and the environment, we find that current GSP tends to favor collective and cooperative work, for both scientific and for societal reasons.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.244
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.280
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2440.280
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0070.063
Scholarly communication0.0320.041
Open science0.0070.018
Research integrity0.0240.031
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.260 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations58
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207