MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403483184 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/mj52a

Cognitive Mode Detectable with Task-Based fMRI: Maintaining Internal Attention (MAIN)

2024· preprint· en· W4403483184 on OpenAlexaff
Ava Momeni, Maddie Evora, Todd S. Woodward

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)CognitionCognitive psychologyMode (computer interface)PsychologyDefault mode networkComputer scienceNeuroscienceHuman–computer interactionEngineering

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 maintaining internal attention (MAIN), a mid-trial-peaking cognitive mode. The task-induced BOLD signal changes associated with MAIN are modulated by a range of tasks, and we present seven here. For each task, we report: (1) highly specific pattern-based (as opposed to coordinate-based) anatomical details essential for distinguishing MAIN from other BOLD-based cognitive modes, and (2) task-induced BOLD signal changes associated with MAIN across a range of task conditions. In order to facilitate recognition, we nick-named the anatomical patterns specific to MAIN as follows: (1) Left-Lateralized Upper Triangle, (2) Left-Lateralized Lower Triangle, (3) Right-Handed Crab Claw, (4) Found a Peanut. Evidence for MAIN was derived from the timing and magnitude of task-induced BOLD signal changes for following tasks: autobiographical event simulation, verbal working memory, non-verbal working memory, thought generation, task-switching, self-reference, and semantic association. Inspection of the task-induced BOLD signal changes associated with MAIN, over the range of tasks mentioned above, consistently supported the cognitive mode interpretation of maintaining attention to internal mental representations.

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)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207