The event related potential technique and microstate analysis of memory guided and visually guided movements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we examined the neural correlates associated with memory guided and visually guided reaching movements using electroencephalography (EEG). Participants performed manual aiming movements to targets under varying delay and visual feedback conditions, with conditions being presented under randomized and blocked schedules. Using the event related potential (ERP) technique we observed the visually evoked potentials (VEPs) associated with the preview of the target as well as the movement related potentials associated with movement execution. While, behavioural findings from the study replicated the typical advantage of having visual feedback over no visual feedback, the electrophysiological data revealed differences in target encoding and movement execution when individuals were engaged in the blocked protocol. In addition, a micro-state analysis involving the full electrode montage was used to examine the clustering of activity across the scalp and time. This analysis not only reinforces our basic ERP findings but also provides us with greater clarity on the potential underlying neural processes sub-serving manual aiming.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".