Assessment of EEG-based functional connectivity in response to haptic delay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
haptic interfaces. However, the delivery of timely haptic feedback remains a challenge due to the stringent computation and communication requirements associated with haptic data transfer. Haptic delay disrupts the realism of the user experience and interferes with the quality of interaction. Research efforts have been devoted to studying the neural correlates of delayed sensory stimulation to better understand and thus mitigate the impact of delay. However, little is known about the functional neural networks that process haptic delay. This paper investigates the underlying neural networks associated with processing haptic delay in passive and active haptic interactions. Nineteen participants completed a visuo-haptic task using a computer screen and a haptic device while electroencephalography (EEG) data were being recorded. A combined approach based on phase locking value (PLV) functional connectivity and graph theory was used. To assay the effects of haptic delay on functional connectivity, we evaluate a global connectivity property through the small-worldness index and a local connectivity property through the nodal strength index. Results suggest that the brain exhibits significantly different network characteristics when a haptic delay is introduced. Haptic delay caused an increased manifestation of the small-worldness index in the delta and theta bands as well as an increased nodal strength index in the middle central region. Inter-regional connectivity analysis showed that the middle central region was significantly connected to the parietal and occipital regions as a result of haptic delay. These results are expected to indicate the detection of conflicting visuo-haptic information at the middle central region and their respective resolution and integration at the parietal and occipital regions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".