MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Challenges and Approaches in the Study of Neural Entrainment

2024· review· en· W4403110513 on OpenAlexafffund
Katharina Duecker, Keith B. Doelling, Assaf Breska, Emily B. J. Coffey, Digavalli V. Sivarao, Benedikt Zoefel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Nationale de la RechercheFondation Pour l'Audition
KeywordsEntrainment (biomusicology)Computer scienceMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When exposed to rhythmic stimulation, the human brain displays rhythmic activity across sensory modalities and regions. Given the ubiquity of this phenomenon, how sensory rhythms are transformed into neural rhythms remains surprisingly inconclusive. An influential model posits that endogenous oscillations entrain to external rhythms, thereby encoding environmental dynamics and shaping perception. However, research on neural entrainment faces multiple challenges, from ambiguous definitions to methodological difficulties when endogenous oscillations need to be identified and disentangled from other stimulus-related mechanisms that can lead to similar phase-locked responses. Yet, recent years have seen novel approaches to overcome these challenges, including computational modeling, insights from dynamical systems theory, sophisticated stimulus designs, and study of neuropsychological impairments. This review outlines key challenges in neural entrainment research, delineates state-of-the-art approaches, and integrates findings from human and animal neurophysiology to provide a broad perspective on the usefulness, validity, and constraints of oscillatory models in brain-environment interaction.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.342
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.022 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207