Ongoing Brain Activity and Its Role in Cognition: Dual versus Baseline Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is the role of the brain's ongoing activity for cognition? The predominant perspectives associate ongoing brain activity with resting state, the default-mode network (DMN), and internally oriented mentation. This triad is often contrasted with task states, non-DMN brain networks, and externally oriented mentation, together comprising a "dual model" of brain and cognition. In opposition to this duality, however, we propose that ongoing brain activity serves as a neuronal baseline; this builds upon Raichle's original search for the default mode of brain function that extended beyond the canonical default-mode brain regions. That entails what we refer to as the "baseline model." Akin to an internal biological clock for the rest of the organism, the ongoing brain activity may serve as an internal point of reference or standard by providing a shared neural code for the brain's rest as well as task states, including their associated cognition. Such shared neural code is manifest in the spatiotemporal organization of the brain's ongoing activity, including its global signal topography and dynamics like intrinsic neural timescales. We conclude that recent empirical evidence supports a baseline model over the dual model; the ongoing activity provides a global shared neural code that allows integrating the brain's rest and task states, its DMN and non-DMN, and internally and externally oriented cognition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".