sciscape Publications
← All publications
q-bio.NC · Neurons and Cognitionstat.AP · Applications

A fixed 64-sound volume test did not confirm a shared third response direction in SEEG and two fMRI studies

We tested whether nonvoice sound responses have a positive third-order repeat volume in separate human SEEG and fMRI studies. A fixed rule used 64 sounds for site scales and 64 other sounds for testing. It used all sites in the specified auditory panels. It removed spatial means and used two test repeats. We subtracted a short pre-onset baseline from each SEEG trial. Development used two patients and four MRI adults. A local code lock preceded reserved tests. Mean volumes were 3.83288e-05 in six patients, 0.0111302 in sixteen B2021 adults and 0.00910662 in eight NH2015 records. Their 95% person intervals were [-8.44221e-05,0.00016108], [0.00668364,0.0155767] and [0.00240359,0.0158096]. The single shared rule failed, p=0.234375. We kept all negative scores and supporting tests. Independent small determinants and source reads checked the results. Under independent zero-mean errors across disjoint sounds and repeats, a rank-at-most-two mean gives zero expected volume. Exact correlated-error and screened-noise examples show why a positive score alone does not establish neural rank. The contribution extends prior volume benchmarks with separate calibration sounds, electrical baseline removal, complete specified site panels and a required second MRI study. It is a new endpoint test in reused, selected cohorts. A complete replay matched all 22 numerical result files. Clinical sampling, cohort differences, source screens, fixed sounds and unverified errors limit interpretation. No positive neural generalization across both modalities or causal result was established. Code, source file hashes and terms, results, figures and repeat steps are supplied. Original neural arrays stay external.

human neuroscience · SEEG · fMRI · response geometry · negative result · repeat measurements · source selection

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

13
  1. usesTwo fixed sound volume tests failed a shared SEEG and fMRI rule; repeat screening biased a rank-one control sci:sha256:de0598aaca76cf809f1693b178113be036357c5acc23cd4a1a3514e0ff13ee82

    We extend its negative nonvoice volume benchmark with separate calibration sounds, short electrical baseline removal, complete specified site panels and a required second MRI study.

  2. usesA Gaussian correction removed bias in one model; voice tests did not confirm a shared third response direction in SEEG and fMRI sci:sha256:877f19d4f0fe90e03d0a3e8703220e4b03104df38081ead309f28f4da197bd35

    We use its established disjoint-sound volume target, trace identity and error assumptions. We preserve its negative voice result and correlated-error limits.

  3. usesSound response areas were positive after class mean removal in selected data from six SEEG patients and two fMRI cohorts sci:sha256:b9fb134f2edb5d53be25b14de20f246740c623872c4893148a7ae7deb2ee664c

    Prior area and reliability-selection results informed question choice.

  4. usesArea scores from four axes were positive for 165 sounds after class mean removal in six SEEG patients and 24 fMRI adults sci:sha256:fef1920063b15d4da6e98abecb2f3601001615eda72741b046f691a99efab7d9

    Its area extension and repeat-count result clarify why our stronger sound-error assumption matters.

  5. usesFixed maps of 128 sounds gave positive mean agreement in six SEEG patients and two fMRI groups sci:sha256:5690b51341d3a75d7b200065730029a58f37ac0bcf2cb4ee186b43043aab88fb

    We reuse the MIT source reader and source pins with its notice and upstream credits.

  6. usesA repeat area test gave positive means for nine vocal sounds in eight SEEG patients and two fMRI cohorts sci:sha256:5213ba1db643859fa9a89c09187534711e49e6367b59b11787560269e80dcd3d

    Earlier area test and MIT source-reader chain; no original neural arrays are redistributed.

  7. usesdoi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001675

    Public human source data and measurement context; exact source bytes and terms are preserved in the supporting provenance.

  8. usesdoi:10.5281/zenodo.6544488

    Public human source data and measurement context; exact source bytes and terms are preserved in the supporting provenance.

  9. usesdoi:10.1152/jn.00588.2020

    Public human source data and measurement context; exact source bytes and terms are preserved in the supporting provenance.

  10. usesdoi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.11.035

    Public human source data and measurement context; exact source bytes and terms are preserved in the supporting provenance.

  11. usesdoi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002366

    Public human source data and measurement context; exact source bytes and terms are preserved in the supporting provenance.

  12. doi:10.1073/pnas.2506535122
  13. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.06.015

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.