MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381149443 · doi:10.1007/s10548-023-00976-7

Linear and Non-linear Analyses of EEG in a Group of ASD Children During Resting State Condition

2023· article· en· W4381149443 on OpenAlexaff
Brenda Y. Angulo-Ruíz, Francisco J. Ruiz‐Martínez, Elena I. Rodríguez‐Martínez, Anca Ionescu, David Saldaña, Carlos M. Gómez

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Topography · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónJunta de AndalucíaUniversidad de Sevilla
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorderElectroencephalographyResting state fMRIAudiologyAutismNeurophysiologyPsychologyIntelligence quotientAlpha (finance)MathematicsStatisticsDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceMedicineCognitionPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyses the spontaneous electroencephalogram (EEG) brain activity of 14 children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) compared to 18 children with normal development, aged 5-11 years. (i) Power Spectral Density (PSD), (ii) variability across trials (coefficient of variation: CV), and (iii) complexity (multiscale entropy: MSE) of the brain signal analysis were computed on the resting state EEG. PSD (0.5-45 Hz) and CV were averaged over different frequency bands (low-delta, delta, theta, alpha, low-beta, high-beta and gamma). MSE were calculated with a coarse-grained procedure on 67 time scales and divided into fine, medium and coarse scales. In addition, significant neurophysiological variables were correlated with behavioral performance data (Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (KBIT) and Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ)). Results show increased PSD fast frequency bands (high-beta and gamma), higher variability (CV) and lower complexity (MSE) in children with ASD when compared to typically developed children. These results suggest a more variable, less complex and, probably, less adaptive neural networks with less capacity to generate optimal responses in ASD children.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain TopographySame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207