MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393950244 · doi:10.1117/1.nph.11.2.020601

iVR-fNIRS: studying brain functions in a fully immersive virtual environment

2024· article· en· W4393950244 on OpenAlexaff
Ke Peng, Zahra Moussavi, Keerthana Deepti Karunakaran, David Borsook, Frédéric Lesage, Dang Khoa Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurophotonics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVirtual realityHuman–computer interactionBrain stimulationBrain–computer interfaceFunctional near-infrared spectroscopyCognitionNeuroscienceElectroencephalographyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immersive virtual reality (iVR) employs head-mounted displays or cave-like environments to create a sensory-rich virtual experience that simulates the physical presence of a user in a digital space. The technology holds immense promise in neuroscience research and therapy. In particular, virtual reality (VR) technologies facilitate the development of diverse tasks and scenarios closely mirroring real-life situations to stimulate the brain within a controlled and secure setting. It also offers a cost-effective solution in providing a similar sense of interaction to users when conventional stimulation methods are limited or unfeasible. Although combining iVR with traditional brain imaging techniques may be difficult due to signal interference or instrumental issues, recent work has proposed the use of functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in conjunction with iVR for versatile brain stimulation paradigms and flexible examination of brain responses. We present a comprehensive review of current research studies employing an iVR-fNIRS setup, covering device types, stimulation approaches, data analysis methods, and major scientific findings. The literature demonstrates a high potential for iVR-fNIRS to explore various types of cognitive, behavioral, and motor functions in a fully immersive VR (iVR) environment. Such studies should set a foundation for adaptive iVR programs for both training (e.g., in novel environments) and clinical therapeutics (e.g., pain, motor and sensory disorders and other psychiatric conditions).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurophotonicsSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207