Table_1_Reliability of P3 Event-Related Potential During Working Memory Across the Spectrum of Cognitive Aging.DOCX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Event-related potentials (ERPs) offer unparalleled temporal resolution in tracing distinct electrophysiological processes related to normal and pathological cognitive aging. The stability of ERPs in older individuals with a vast range of cognitive ability has not been established. In this test-retest reliability study, 39 older individuals (age 74.10 (5.4) years; 23 (59%) women; 15 non β-amyloid elevated, 16 β-amyloid elevated, 8 cognitively impaired) with scores on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) ranging between 3 and 30 completed a working memory (n-back) test with three levels of difficulty at baseline and 2-week follow-up. The main aim was to evaluate stability of the ERP on grand averaged task effects for both visits in the total sample (n = 39). Secondary aims were to evaluate the effect of age, group (non β-amyloid elevated; β-amyloid elevated, cognitively impaired), cognitive status (MOCA), and task difficulty on ERP reliability. P3 peak amplitude and latency were measured in predetermined channels. P3 peak amplitude at Fz, our main outcome variable, showed excellent reliability in 0-back (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), 95% confidence interval = 0.82 (0.67–0.90) and 1-back (ICC = 0.87 (0.76–0.93), however, only fair reliability in 2-back (ICC = 0.53 (0.09–0.75). Reliability of P3 peak latencies was substantially lower, with ICCs ranging between 0.17 for 2-back and 0.54 for 0-back. Generalized linear mixed models showed no confounding effect of age, group, or task difficulty on stability of P3 amplitude and latency of Fz. By contrast, MOCA scores tended to negatively correlate with P3 amplitude of Fz (p = 0.07). We conclude that P3 peak amplitude, and to lesser extent P3 peak latency, provide a stable measure of electrophysiological processes in older individuals.</p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".