MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410206987 · doi:10.7554/elife.100123.2

Imaging of brain electric field networks with spatially resolved EEG

2025· preprint· en· W4410206987 on OpenAlexaff
Lawrence R. Frank, V. L. Galinsky, Olave E. Krigolson, Susan F. Tapert, Stephan Bickel, Antı́gona Martı́nez

Bibliographic record

VenueeLife · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyField (mathematics)Electric fieldNeuroscienceNeuroimagingPsychologyComputer sciencePhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a method for spatially resolving the electric field potential throughout the entire volume of the human brain from electroencephalography (EEG) data. The method is not a variation of the well-known ‘source reconstruction’ methods, but rather a direct solution to the EEG inverse problem based on our recently developed model for brain waves that demonstrates the inadequacy of the standard ‘quasi-static approximation’ that has fostered the belief that such a reconstruction is not physically possible. The method retains the high temporal/frequency resolution of EEG yet has spatial resolution comparable to (or better than) functional MRI (fMRI), without its significant inherent limitations. The method is validated using simultaneous EEG/fMRI data in healthy subjects, intracranial EEG data in epilepsy patients, comparison with numerical simulations, and a direct comparison with standard state-of-the-art EEG analysis in a well-established attention paradigm. The method is then demonstrated on a very large cohort of subjects performing a standard gambling task designed to activate the brain’s ‘reward circuit’. The technique uses the output from standard extant EEG systems and thus has potential for immediate benefit to a broad range of important basic scientific and clinical questions concerning brain electrical activity. By offering an inexpensive and portable alternative to fMRI, it provides a realistic methodology to efficiently promote the democratization of medicine.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeLife→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→