MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411541375 · doi:10.1002/hbm.70536

The Neural Processes Underpinning Flexible Semantic Retrieval in Visual and Auditory Modalities

2025· preprint· en· W4411541375 on OpenAlexaff
Ximing Shao, Meichao Zhang, Xiuyi Wang, André Gouws, Rebecca L. Jackson, Jonathan Smallwood, Katya Krieger-Redwood, Elizabeth Jefferies

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersEuropean Research Council
KeywordsModalitiesCognitionCognitive psychologyPsychologyPerceptionTask (project management)Modality (human–computer interaction)Semantic memoryControl (management)Dissociation (chemistry)Computer scienceNatural language processingNeuroscienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contemporary accounts of semantic cognition propose that conceptual knowledge is supported by a heteromodal conceptual store and controlled retrieval processes. However, it remains unclear how the neural basis of semantic control varies across modalities. Recent models of cortical organisation suggest that control networks are distributed along a unimodal-to-heteromodal cortical gradient, with the semantic control network (SCN) located in more heteromodal cortex than the domain-general multiple demand network (MDN). We used fMRI to examine how these networks respond to semantic control demands in visual and auditory tasks. Participants judged the semantic relatedness of spoken and written word pairs. On half of the trials, a task cue specified the semantic feature to guide retrieval; on the remaining trials, no such cue was given. The SCN showed greater activation when task knowledge was available, consistent with a role in the top-down control of semantic retrieval across modalities. In contrast, the MDN showed greater activation for spoken words, likely reflecting increased demands in speech perception. These findings demonstrate a dissociation between control networks, with SCN involvement modulated by task structure and MDN activity influenced by perceptual difficulty.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 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 venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207