Hierarchical Semi-Markov Smooth Models of Latent Neural States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hidden (semi-) Markov Models (HsMMs) are increasingly being used to segment neurophysiological signals into sequences of latent cognitive processes. The idea: different processes will leave distinct traces in trial-level recordings of (multivariate) neuro-physiological signals. Markov models, equipped with an emission model of these traces and a latent process model describing the progression through the different latent processes involved in a task, can then be used to infer the most likely process for any time-point and trial. However, the currently used HsMMs remain limited in two important ways. First, they cannot account for subject-level heterogeneity in the latent and emission process. Instead, a single group-level model is assumed to explain the entire data. Second, they cannot account for the potentially non-linear effects of experimental covariates on the latent and emission process. To address these problems, we present a modeling framework in which the HsMM parameters of the emission and latent process are replaced with mixed additive models, including smooth functions of experimental covariates and random effects. We derive all necessary quantities for empirical Bayes and fully Bayesian inference for all parameters and provide a Python implementation of all estimation algorithms. To demonstrate the advantages offered by this framework, we apply such a multi-level model to an existing lexical decision dataset. We show that, even in such a simple task, not all subjects rely on the same processes equally and that at least two semi-Markov states, previously believed to reflect distinct processes, might actually relate to the same cognitive process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".