Dataset Information

Inductive Reasoning Differs Between Taxonomic and Thematic Contexts: Electrophysiological Evidence.

ABSTRACT: Inductive reasoning can be performed in different contexts, but it is unclear whether the neural mechanism of reasoning performed in a thematic context (e.g., bee has x, so honey has x) is the same as that performed in a taxonomic context (e.g., bee has x, so butterfly has x). In the present study, participants were required to judge whether a conclusion was acceptable or not based on its premise, for which the taxonomic or thematic distances between premise and conclusion objects were either far or near. The Event related potential (ERP) results indicated that the effect of context (taxonomic vs. thematic) was initially observed in the P2 component; while the distance effect (far vs. near) was observed in N400 and late components. Moreover, the distance effect on thematic-based inductive reasoning was found in the anterior regions, while the distance effect on taxonomic-based inductive reasoning conditions was found in the posterior regions. These results support the view that inductive reasoning is performed differently under different semantic contexts.

SUBMITTER: Liu F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6669940 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Inductive Reasoning Differs Between Taxonomic and Thematic Contexts: Electrophysiological Evidence.

Liu Fangfang F Han Jiahui J Zhang Lingcong L Li Fuhong F

Frontiers in psychology 20190725

Inductive reasoning can be performed in different contexts, but it is unclear whether the neural mechanism of reasoning performed in a thematic context (e.g., bee has x, so honey has x) is the same as that performed in a taxonomic context (e.g., bee has x, so butterfly has x). In the present study, participants were required to judge whether a conclusion was acceptable or not based on its premise, for which the taxonomic or thematic distances between premise and conclusion objects were either fa ...[more]

PMID: 31402887

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe analysis of electronic medical records at scale to learn from clinical experience is currently very challenging. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI), specifically foundational large language models (LLMs), into an analysis pipeline may overcome some of the current limitations of modest input sizes, inaccuracies, biases, and incomplete knowledge bases.ObjectiveTo explore the effectiveness of using an LLM for generating realistic clinical data and other LLMs for summarizing and synthesizing information in a model system, simulating a randomized clinical trial (RCT) in epilepsy to demonstrate the potential of inductive reasoning via medical chart review.DesignAn LLM-generated simulated RCT based on a RCT for treatment with an antiseizure medication, cenobamate, including a placebo arm and a full-strength drug arm, evaluated by an LLM-based pipeline versus a human reader.SettingSimulation based on realistic seizure diaries, treatment effects, reported symptoms and clinical notes generated by LLMs with multiple different neurologist writing styles.ParticipantsSimulated cohort of 240 patients, divided 1:1 into placebo and drug arms.InterventionUtilization of LLMs for the generation of clinical notes and for the synthesis of data from these notes, aiming to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cenobamate in seizure control either with a human evaluator or AI-pipeline.MeasuresThe AI and human analysis focused on identifying the number of seizures, symptom reports, and treatment efficacy, with statistical analysis comparing the 50%-responder rate and median percentage change between the placebo and drug arms, as well as side effect rates in each arm.ResultsAI closely mirrored human analysis, demonstrating the drug's efficacy with marginal differences (<3%) in identifying both drug efficacy and reported symptoms.Conclusions and relevanceThis study showcases the potential of LLMs accurately simulate and analyze clinical trials. Significantly, it highlights the ability of LLMs to reconstruct essential trial elements, identify treatment effects, and recognize reported symptoms, within a realistic clinical framework. The findings underscore the relevance of LLMs in future clinical research, offering a scalable, efficient alternative to traditional data mining methods without the need for specialized medical language training.

Dataset Information

Inductive Reasoning Differs Between Taxonomic and Thematic Contexts: Electrophysiological Evidence.

Publications

Inductive Reasoning Differs Between Taxonomic and Thematic Contexts: Electrophysiological Evidence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets