MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Concurrent Assessment of Sequential Auditory ERPs Using an Optimized Paired-stimulus Local-global Paradigm

2025· preprint· en· W4411968452 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersDalian University of Technology
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)PsychologyAudiologySpeech recognitionCognitive psychologyComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comprehensive assessment of auditory processing is crucial for understanding perceptual and attentional functions, as well as detecting related deficits in clinical populations. Auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) track key stages through time-locked components that emerge from early sensory processing (P1-N1-P2 complex) and automatic deviance detection (mismatch negativity, MMN) to involuntary attention orienting (P3a) and voluntary attention engagement (P3b). However, current approaches predominantly focus on isolated ERP components demonstrated through group-level statistical difference, while paradigms capable of capturing sequential components with high individual sensitivity remain scarce. Here, we optimized the local-global paradigm with a paired-stimulus design, strategically capturing pre-attentive to voluntary processing by contrasting responses to within-pair violations (local effect) versus across-pair violations (global effect). We evaluated this paradigm in 30 healthy participants under both active (target counting) and passive (visual distraction) conditions. Results demonstrated that both conditions reliably elicited complete pre-attentive components (P1-N1-P2 and MMN) as confirmed by cluster-based permutation tests, achieving 30/30 individual-level sensitivity validated through intrasubject classification analysis. Furthermore, comparison between active and passive conditions revealed significant differences specifically in the 272-392ms and 272-400ms window ( p < 0.05) under two levels of global deviants. This contrast successfully dissociated voluntary from involuntary attention with 86.67% and 93.33% individual sensitivity, respectively. Moreover, the active-passive discrimination depended primarily on the number of epochs sampled ( p <0.001) rather than the number of sensors used ( p >0.05). These findings validate our paired-stimulus local-global paradigm as a reliable approach for assessing sequential auditory ERPs, offering significant advantages with potential applications in clinical evaluation of perceptual and attentional impairments.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207