MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283722207 · doi:10.1111/psyp.14131

On target selection as reflected by posterior <scp>ERP</scp> components in feature‐guided visual search

2022· article· en· W4283722207 on OpenAlexafffund
Roberto Dell’Acqua, Mattia Doro, Sabrina Brigadoi, Brandi Lee Drisdelle, Amour Simal, Valentina Baro, Pierre Jolicœur

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsRoyal Society
KeywordsN2pcFixation (population genetics)Visual searchPsychologyCovertNeuroscienceFeature (linguistics)Component (thermodynamics)CommunicationVisual attentionCognitionChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The N2pc event-related potential is a widely studied ERP component that reflects the covert deployment of visuo-spatial attention to target stimuli displayed laterally relative to fixation. Recently, an analogous ERP component, named N2pcb, has been proposed as a marker of the deployment of visuo-spatial attention to targets displayed on the vertical midline. Two studies that investigated the N2pcb component found analogous results, using however two different algorithms to compute the amplitude of N2pcb. One study subtracted the ipsilateral activity elicited by a lateral target from the bilateral activity elicited by a target displayed on the vertical midline, whereas the other study subtracted the bilateral activity elicited by target-absent displays from the bilateral activity elicited by a target displayed on the vertical midline. Here we show both algorithms estimate properly the N2pc as well as the N2pcb components. In addition, we explored whether the singleton detection positivity (SDP) component, a posterior bilateral positivity temporally concomitant to N2pc recently reported in studies using singleton search, could be observed in the present study in which a target was defined by a combination of features. Given that such component was indeed found using feature search, we named this component posterior processing positivity (PPP), and showed that bilateral activity elicited by target-absent displays is an adequate baseline for its correct isolation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychophysiologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207