MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386086033 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3213860/v1

Spatial Resolution of Phosphenes within the Visual Field using Non-Invasive Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation

2023· preprint· en· W4386086033 on OpenAlexafffund
Faraz Sadrzadeh-Afsharazar, Alexandre Douplik

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhospheneVisual fieldVisual cortexTranscranial magnetic stimulationStimulationVisual perceptionNeurosciencePsychologyBrain stimulationTranscranial direct-current stimulationPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Non-Invasive Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (NITACS) is a method that applies weak electrical currents to the scalp or face to modulate brain activity. A fascinating application of NITACS is the induction of phosphenes — visual phenomena where individuals perceive light without external stimuli. These phosphenes have been observed and generated through various techniques, including direct electrical stimulation of the visual cortex. However, NITACS provides a non-invasive way to create these visual effects. This research aimed to understand the spatial resolution of NITACS-induced phosphenes, vital for visual aid technology and neuroscience. Eight healthy participants underwent NITACS with a novel electrode configuration on the face. Findings indicated that NITACS could induce phosphenes that showed spatially defined patterns in the visual field. The phosphene locations differed among participants but were consistently within the visual field. These patterns remained stable across repeated stimulations. Optimal parameters were determined for inducing vibrant phosphenes without discomfort. The study also identified electrode positions that moved phosphenes to various visual field regions. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis estimated specificity and sensitivity at 70.7% and 73.9%, respectively, with a control trial effectiveness of 98.4%. Overall, NITACS holds promise as a reliable non-invasive means to modulate visual perception.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207