MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387007978 · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/acfcd9

Single-trial classification of evoked responses to auditory tones using OPM- and SQUID-MEG

2023· article· en· W4387007978 on OpenAlex
Joonas Iivanainen, Tony R. Carter, Michael Trumbo, Jim McKay, Samu Taulu, Jun Wang, Julia M. Stephen, Peter Schwindt, Amir Borna

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsCoquitlam College
FundersLaboratory Directed Research and DevelopmentNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsMagnetoencephalographySquidComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionLinear discriminant analysisElectroencephalographyNeurosciencePsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. Optically pumped magnetometers (OPMs) are emerging as a near-room-temperature alternative to superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs) for magnetoencephalography (MEG). In contrast to SQUIDs, OPMs can be placed in a close proximity to subject’s scalp potentially increasing the signal-to-noise ratio and spatial resolution of MEG. However, experimental demonstrations of these suggested benefits are still scarce. Here, to compare a 24-channel OPM-MEG system to a commercial whole-head SQUID system in a data-driven way, we quantified their performance in classifying single-trial evoked responses. Approach. We measured evoked responses to three auditory tones in six participants using both OPM- and SQUID-MEG systems. We performed pairwise temporal classification of the single-trial responses with linear discriminant analysis as well as multiclass classification with both EEGNet convolutional neural network and xDAWN decoding. Main results. OPMs provided higher classification accuracies than SQUIDs having a similar coverage of the left hemisphere of the participant. However, the SQUID sensors covering the whole helmet had classification scores larger than those of OPMs for two of the tone pairs, demonstrating the benefits of a whole-head measurement. Significance. The results demonstrate that the current OPM-MEG system provides high-quality data about the brain with room for improvement for high bandwidth non-invasive brain–computer interfacing.

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.

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 score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.262 · 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