MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394619363 · doi:10.1142/s0218348x24500683

ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF VARIOUS MENTAL TASKS ON THE EEG SIGNALS’ COMPLEXITY

2024· article· en· W4394619363 on OpenAlexaff
Najmeh Pakniyat, Ondřej Krejcar, Petra Marešová, Jamaluddin Abdullah

Bibliographic record

VenueFractals · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsOntario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyComputer sciencePsychologyMental arithmeticCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)NeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of the brain activity in different mental tasks is an important area of research. We used complexity-based analysis to study the changes in brain activity in four mental tasks: relaxation, Stroop color-word, mirror image recognition, and arithmetic tasks. We used fractal theory, sample entropy, and approximate entropy to analyze the changes in electroencephalogram (EEG) signals between different tasks. Our analysis showed that by moving from relaxation to the Stroop color-word, arithmetic, and mirror image recognition tasks, the complexity of EEG signals increases, respectively, reflecting rising brain activity between these conditions. Furthermore, only the fractal theory could decode the significant changes in brain activity between different conditions. Similar analyses can be done to decode the brain activity in case of other 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFractalsSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207