MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399097616 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/c83d7

Cognitive Mode Detectable with Task-Based fMRI: Language (LAN)

2024· preprint· en· W4399097616 on OpenAlexaff
Erica Zeng, John Shahki, Todd S. Woodward

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsProvincial Health Services AuthorityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefault mode networkCognitionNeuroscienceCognitive scienceMode (computer interface)PsychologyComputer scienceCognitive psychologyAnatomyMedicineHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of task-based functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), cognitive modes can be defined as task-general cognitive/sensory/motor processes which reliably elicit specific blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) signal pattern configurations. A number of cognitive modes are detectable with task-based fMRI, and here we focus on language (LAN). The BOLD signal configurations associated with LAN are modulated by a range of tasks, and here we present six. For each task, we report: (1) specific pattern-based (as opposed to coordinate-based) anatomical details essential for distinguishing LAN from other BOLD-based cognitive modes, and (2) task-induced BOLD signal changes associated with LAN over a range of task conditions. In order to facilitate recognition, we nick-named the anatomical patterns specific to LAN as follows: (1) Tears Blown Leftwards/Eyebrows, (2) Rail Shot Coronal, (3) Rail Shot Axial, and (4) Disappearing Face. Evidence for LAN was derived from the timing and magnitude of task-induced BOLD signal changes induced by the following tasks: two lexical decision tasks, metrical stress, noun/verb discrimination, semantic association, and facial emotion discrimination. The evidence consistently supports that the LAN includes both activation and suppression depending on the linguistic information processing required to achieve the task goals, as well as possible extension to non-verbal communication.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207