MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313280470 · doi:10.1002/hbm.26190

Direct modulation index: A measure of phase amplitude coupling for neurophysiology data

2022· article· en· W4313280470 on OpenAlexaff
Maximilian Scherer, Tianlu Wang, Robert Guggenberger, Luka Milosevic, Alireza Gharabaghi

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungEberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
KeywordsMeasure (data warehouse)NeurophysiologyAmplitudeCoupling (piping)Modulation (music)Phase (matter)Index (typography)Amplitude modulationPhysicsModulation indexNeurosciencePsychologyFrequency modulationComputer scienceMaterials scienceOpticsData miningAcousticsTelecommunicationsQuantum mechanicsPulse-width modulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural communication across different spatial and temporal scales is a topic of great interest in clinical and basic science. Phase-amplitude coupling (PAC) has attracted particular interest due to its functional role in a wide range of cognitive and motor functions. Here, we introduce a novel measure termed the direct modulation index (dMI). Based on the classical modulation index, dMI provides an estimate of PAC that is (1) bound to an absolute interval between 0 and +1, (2) resistant against noise, and (3) reliable even for small amounts of data. To highlight the properties of this newly-proposed measure, we evaluated dMI by comparing it to the classical modulation index, mean vector length, and phase-locking value using simulated data. We ascertained that dMI provides a more accurate estimate of PAC than the existing methods and that is resilient to varying noise levels and signal lengths. As such, dMI permits a reliable investigation of PAC, which may reveal insights crucial to our understanding of functional brain architecture in key contexts such as behaviour and cognition. A Python toolbox that implements dMI and other measures of PAC is freely available at https://github.com/neurophysiological-analysis/FiNN.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: Other design
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207