{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"6953f4239276ef1ee07a32a3","dataset_id":"ds002550","associated_paper_doi":null,"authors":["Romain Quentin","Jean-Remi King","Etienne Sallard","Nathan Fishman","Ryan Thompson","Ethan Buch","Leonardo Cohen"],"bids_version":"1.1.1","contact_info":["romain quentin"],"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":false,"dataset_doi":"10.18112/openneuro.ds002550.v1.0.1","datatypes":["meg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":22,"ages":[],"age_min":null,"age_max":null,"age_mean":null,"species":null,"sex_distribution":{"m":6,"f":16},"handedness_distribution":null},"experimental_modalities":null,"external_links":{"source_url":"https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds002550","osf_url":null,"github_url":null,"paper_url":null},"funding":["NINDS/HCPS","FYSSEN foundation","Bettencourt Schueller Foundation"],"ingestion_fingerprint":"e716341d4be8c6bb5a772882568828d0a4253351dccd3768ae3d0c4c0eb85f9a","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"Differential brain mechanisms of selection and maintenance of information during working memory (MEG data)","readme":"OpenNeuro curator note: This dataset was previously accessible at ds001750. The dataset was reuploaded due to privacy considerations.\n# Data folder corresponding to [this manuscript](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/03/16/283234)\n#### Differential brain mechanisms of selection and maintenance of information during working memory\nNote: One participant didn't sign a sharing data agreement so data of 22 participants are available here (vs. 23 in the manuscript). Results and conclusion are not different with only 22 participants.\nParticipant folder are organized as:\n- ##### 'ses-mri/anat':\ncontains T1 MRI of the participant\n- ##### ses-01:\ncontains MEG data in BIDS format, behavioral data and HPI position in surface RAS MRI coordinates for session 1\n- ##### ses-02:\ncontains MEG data in BIDS format, behavioral data and HPI position in surface RAS MRI coordinates for session 2\n##### Description of non-MEG files:\n- ##### behavioral task scripts:\nMatlab (psychtoolbox 3) script for Working Memory (WorkMem) and one-back control task (LocaCue)\n- ##### hpi_mri_surf.txt:\nContains the X, Y Z coordinates of the nasion, left and right HPI (head position indicator) in surface MRI coordinates. Names of the electrode are NEC (nasion), LEC (left) and REC (right). Others coordinates are for co-registration during the session (not useful here). These HPI coordinates have been acquired from the neuronavigation system brainsight (https://www.rogue-research.com/tms/brainsight-tms/)\n- ##### WorkMem+subNumber+date.csv:\n###### Contains behavioral results:\n- NbTrial: trial number\n- FixNbTrial: trial number with good eye fixation\n- isFixed: whether the participant fixed the central dot during the trial (1:correct fixation, 0:broke fixation)\n- GaborLeft: left gabor (25 possible, 5 spatial frequency* 5 orientations)\n- GaborRight: right gabor (25 possible, 5 spatial frequency* 5 orientations)\n- Cue: cue (4 possible, 1: left dotted, 2: left solid, 3: right dotted, 4: left solid)\n- Change: whether the cued stimulus attribute is different from the corresponding probe attribute (1: different, 0: same)\n- sfLeft: spatial frequency of the left gabor (5 possible)\n- orientLeft: line orientation of the left gabor (5 possible)\n- phaseLeft: phase of the left gabor (5 possible)\n- sfRight: spatial frequency of the right gabor (5 possible)\n- orientRight: line orientation of the right gabor (5 possible)\n- phaseRight: phase of the right gabor (5 possible)\n- randomSF: probe spatial frequency if change=1\n- randomOrient: line orientation if change=1\n- phaseResp: phase of the probe\n- Response: response of the participant (1: different, 0: similar)\n- isCorrect: correctness of the response (1: correct, 0: uncorrect)\n- reactionTime: reaction time from probe onset to participant response\n- TrialTime: total trial duration\n- runningTime: running time\n- fixcrossTime: duration of the fixation dot presentation before stimulus onset (should be between 0.350 and 0.450 s)\n- gaborTime: duration of stimulus presentation (should be 0.1 s)\n- precueTime: duration between stimulus offset and cue onset (should be between 0.75 and 0.85 s)\n- cueTime: duration of the cue presentation (should be 0.1 s)\n- postcueTime: duration between cue offset and probe onset (should be between 1.45 and 1.55 s)\n- feedbackTime: duration of the feedback (green or red dot, should be 0.1 s)\n- triggGabor: trigger sent to MEG acquisition at the stimulus onset\n- triggCue: trigger sent to MEG acquisition at the cue onset\n- triggProbe: trigger sent to MEG acquisition at the probe onset\n- ##### locacue+subNumber+date.csv:\n- NbTrial: trial number\n- FixNbTrial: trial number with good eye fixation\n- isFixed: whether the participant fixed the central dot during the trial (1:correct fixation, 0:broke fixation)\n- same: whether 2 consecutive lines are similar (1: similar, 0: different)\n- Cue: cue (4 possible, 1: left dotted, 2: left solid, 3: right dotted, 4: left solid)\n- Side: side of the cue (1: right, 0: left)\n- Press: whether the participant press the button (1: press, 0: no press)\n- isCorrect: correctness of the response (1: correct, 0: uncorrect)\n- ReactionTime: reaction time when a button is pressed\n- TrialTime: total trial duration\n- runningTime: running time\n- fixcrossTime: duration of the fixation dot\n- cueTime: duration of the cue presentation (should be 0.1 s)\n- postcueTime: duration between the cue offset and the beginning of the next trial (should be 1.2 s)","recording_modality":["meg"],"senior_author":"Leonardo Cohen","sessions":["01","02"],"size_bytes":179848999649,"source":"openneuro","study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["LocalizerControl","WorkingMemory"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-04-22T12:25:27.212072+00:00","dataset_created_at":"2020-02-12T20:34:30.079Z","dataset_modified_at":"2020-05-05T23:51:45.000Z"},"total_files":377,"storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds002550","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","acq-mprage_T1w.json","participants.json","participants.tsv"]},"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"4a051be509a0e3d0","metadata_hash":"b1ec9817946d1862","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-01-20T10:10:32.031537+00:00"},"tags":{"pathology":["Healthy"],"modality":["Visual"],"type":["Memory"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.65,"modality":0.85,"type":0.85},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"Closest few-shot by research construct is the digit span dataset (Healthy / Auditory / Memory), which demonstrates the convention that working-memory paradigms map to Type=Memory even when there are button-press responses. Closest few-shot by stimulus format is the schizophrenia visual discrimination task (Schizophrenia/Psychosis / Visual / Perception), which demonstrates the convention that visually presented psychophysics-style stimuli (e.g., moving dots) map to Modality=Visual; in the current dataset the stimuli are also explicit visual items (Gabors), but the aim is working memory rather than perception.","metadata_analysis":"Key quotes indicating the cognitive focus and task: (1) \"Differential brain mechanisms of selection and maintenance of information during working memory\". (2) \"Matlab (psychtoolbox 3) script for Working Memory (WorkMem) and one-back control task (LocaCue)\". Key quotes indicating stimulus modality: (3) \"GaborLeft: left gabor\" and \"GaborRight: right gabor\" with parameters like \"spatial frequency\" and \"orientations\". (4) \"Cue\" and \"Change\" / \"probe\" fields (e.g., \"phaseResp: phase of the probe\"; \"reactionTime: reaction time from probe onset to participant response\") indicate a cued visual working-memory comparison at probe.","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information (only a manuscript link is provided in the README; no abstract text is included in the metadata supplied).","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology: Metadata says nothing about any diagnosed/clinical recruitment group (only \"22 participants\" and a sharing note). Few-shot pattern suggests Healthy when no disorder is mentioned (e.g., digit span, gambling task). ALIGN.\nModality: Metadata explicitly describes \"GaborLeft\"/\"GaborRight\" stimuli and visual cue/probe structure. Few-shot convention maps such stimuli to Visual (e.g., visual discrimination task). ALIGN.\nType: Metadata explicitly frames the study as \"working memory\" and includes a \"Working Memory (WorkMem)\" task. Few-shot convention maps working-memory paradigms to Type=Memory (digit span example). ALIGN (despite also involving attentional selection/maintenance, the primary construct named is working memory).","decision_summary":"Pathology top-2: (A) Healthy — supported by absence of any diagnosis/group labels and generic participant wording (\"22 participants\"); aligns with few-shot convention for non-clinical cognitive datasets. (B) Unknown — possible because health status is not explicitly stated. Winner: Healthy. Confidence basis: no direct 'healthy' quote, so moderate.\nModality top-2: (A) Visual — supported by \"GaborLeft\"/\"GaborRight\" and visual cue/probe parameters (spatial frequency/orientation/phase). (B) Multisensory — weak/no evidence of non-visual stimuli. Winner: Visual. Confidence basis: multiple explicit stimulus-field quotes.\nType top-2: (A) Memory — supported by explicit framing \"working memory\" and the named \"Working Memory (WorkMem)\" task, plus probe-based same/different judgment typical of WM. (B) Attention — plausible because the manuscript mentions \"selection\" and there is cueing, but secondary to WM framing. Winner: Memory. Confidence basis: multiple explicit WM quotes."}},"nemar_citation_count":0,"computed_title":"Differential brain mechanisms of selection and maintenance of information during working memory (MEG data)","nchans_counts":[{"val":308,"count":367},{"val":307,"count":8},{"val":304,"count":2}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":1200.0,"count":374},{"val":12000.0,"count":3}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-04-22T23:16:00.221600+00:00","total_duration_s":109833.68391666666,"author_year":"Quentin2020","canonical_name":null}}