MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413855985 · doi:10.1101/2025.08.29.672336

Precise temporal localisation of M/EEG effects with Bayesian generalised additive multilevel models

2025· preprint· en· W4413855985 on OpenAlexaff
Ladislas Nalborczyk, Paul‐Christian Bürkner

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayesian probabilityElectroencephalographyMultilevel modelEconometricsBayesian hierarchical modelingBayesian inferencePsychologyStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Time-resolved electrophysiological measurements such as those obtained through magneto- and electroencephalography (M/EEG) offer a unique window onto the neural activity underlying cognitive processes. Researchers are often interested in determining whether and when these signals differ across experimental conditions or participant groups. The conventional approach involves mass univariate statistical testing across time and space followed by corrections for multiple comparisons or some form of cluster-based inference. While effective for controlling error rates at the cluster-level, clusterbased inference comes with a significant limitation: by shifting the focus of inference from individual time points to clusters, it prevents drawing conclusions about the precise onset or offset of observed effects. Here, we present a model-based alternative for analysing M/EEG timeseries, such as event-related potentials or time-resolved decoding accuracy. Our approach leverages Bayesian generalised additive multilevel models, providing posterior odds that an effect exceeds zero (or chance) at each time point, while naturally accounting for temporal dependencies and between-subject variability. Using both simulated and empirical M/EEG datasets, we show that this approach substantially outperforms conventional methods in estimating the onset and offset of neural effects, yielding more precise and reliable estimates. We provide an open-source R package implementing the method and describe how it can be integrated into M/EEG analysis pipelines using MNE-Python.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207