{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"6953f4249276ef1ee07a33c9","dataset_id":"ds005280","associated_paper_doi":null,"authors":["Zhao Xiangyue","Zhou Jingyao","Zhang Libo","Duan Haoqing","Wei Shiyu","Bi Yanzhi","Hu Li"],"bids_version":"1.1.1","contact_info":["Xiangyue Zhao"],"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":true,"dataset_doi":"doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005280.v1.0.0","datatypes":["eeg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":223,"ages":[19,19,22,21,24,19,18,18,18,18,19,24,26,25,23,21,24,23,23,27,20,23,24,21,19,19,22,19,19,21,18,19,21,19,18,23,18,19,19,23,22,19,22,19,20,21,18,21,23,23,20,21,19,18,20,21,19,20,20,21,18,20,21,22,19,26,23,20,32,21,21,21,20,18,21,22,22,22,21,19,20,21,20,19,20,25,20,24,19,19,21,19,21,19,22,22,23,20,20,18,22,23,21,18,23,26,20,19,23,20,21,21,21,21,19,19,23,17,22,22,20,21,26,18,20,19,19,18,19,19,19,23,19,18,19,20,19,21,19,20,24,21,20,19,19,18,19,23,20,24,21,18,24,21,24,25,20,21,26,20,25,19,20,16,20,20,22,21,21,21,20,20,23,20,21,21,21,25,19,19,22,20,19,20,28,24,19,21,18,22,20,20,20,18,26,19,21,22,20,19,24,23,21,19,19,20,19,25,19,20,19,18,23,19,22,19,19,25,22,23,21,25,23],"age_min":16,"age_max":32,"age_mean":20.83408071748879,"species":null,"sex_distribution":{"f":130,"m":93},"handedness_distribution":null},"experimental_modalities":null,"external_links":{"source_url":"https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds005280","osf_url":null,"github_url":null,"paper_url":null},"funding":[],"ingestion_fingerprint":"1fb79ad3ae0cee7432ae76654a2e2dc3c50a3a65b184b8a40feeb76ac01732fa","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"223 By BP","readme":"1.Study introduction:\nIn this experiment, participants received fixed-intensity pain stimuli at 3J / 3.5J (low pain) and 3.5J / 4J (high pain). Each participant underwent stimulation in 3 blocks, with each block comprising 10 stimuli, totaling 30 stimuli. High and low pain stimuli were evenly distributed within each block. After each stimulation, participants provided pain ratings individually. Pain ratings were as follows: 0 indicated no sensation at all, 4 indicated the onset of pain, 6 represented moderate pain, 8 indicated severe pain, and 10 denoted unbearable pain.\n2.Participant task information(description of the experiment):\nParticipants received laser stimulation and subsequently provided pain intensity ratings one by one.\n3.Participant instructions(as exact as possible):\nParticipants were instructed to focus on the laser stimulation, keep their eyes open, and fix their gaze on the crosshairs displayed on the screen.  After each laser stimulation, there is a five-second pause.  Participants then rated the intensity of the pain.  Subsequent trials began at random 5 seconds after the score was provided.","recording_modality":["eeg"],"senior_author":"Hu Li","sessions":["1","2","3"],"size_bytes":45503186303,"source":"openneuro","study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["223ByBP"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-04-22T12:27:30.125065+00:00","dataset_created_at":"2024-06-25T10:11:53.180Z","dataset_modified_at":"2024-06-26T06:57:02.000Z"},"total_files":669,"storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds005280","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","participants.json","participants.tsv","task-223ByBP_events.json"]},"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"4a051be509a0e3d0","metadata_hash":"7654e9febc719b14","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-01-20T17:44:13.410188+00:00"},"tags":{"pathology":["Healthy"],"modality":["Tactile"],"type":["Perception"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.6,"modality":0.8,"type":0.7},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"Closest few-shot match by stimulus channel is the 'Braille letters - EEG' example (Pathology=Other, Modality=Tactile, Type=Learning). That example shows the convention that somatosensory stimulation delivered to the skin/fingers maps to the Modality label 'Tactile' (even when responses are pedal/button presses). In the current dataset, the stimulation is laser-evoked pain (nociceptive somatosensory input), so by the same convention the dominant stimulus channel should also be labeled 'Tactile'. For Type, the few-shot set suggests that when the primary manipulated variable is sensory stimulus intensity and the main outcome is perception/ratings of that stimulus, 'Perception' is the closest construct (rather than task mechanics).","metadata_analysis":"Key facts from the provided README: (1) Pain stimulation paradigm: \"participants received fixed-intensity pain stimuli\" and \"Participants received laser stimulation\". (2) Intensity manipulation + subjective perception report: \"low pain\" vs \"high pain\" and \"participants provided pain ratings individually\" / \"rated the intensity of the pain\". (3) Visual fixation is present but ancillary: \"fix their gaze on the crosshairs displayed on the screen\" (used for attention control, not the primary stimulus channel). No explicit clinical diagnosis or patient recruitment criteria are mentioned anywhere in the metadata.","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information.","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology: Metadata SAYS no diagnosis/clinical group (only generic \"participants\"; no mention of patients/controls). Few-shot pattern SUGGESTS labeling as 'Healthy' when there is no clinical recruitment focus. ALIGN (no conflict; inference-based).\nModality: Metadata SAYS \"laser stimulation\" and \"pain stimuli\" (somatosensory/nociceptive input). Few-shot pattern SUGGESTS mapping somatosensory stimulation paradigms to 'Tactile' (e.g., Braille cell stimulation). ALIGN.\nType: Metadata SAYS the experiment centers on perceived pain intensity (\"low pain\"/\"high pain\"; \"pain intensity ratings\"). Few-shot pattern SUGGESTS that sensory intensity/discrimination/ratings paradigms map to 'Perception' (construct about sensory experience rather than motor response). ALIGN; runner-up could be 'Affect' because pain is aversive, but the metadata emphasizes intensity perception/ratings rather than emotion induction/regulation.","decision_summary":"Pathology top-2: (1) Healthy — supported by lack of any clinical recruitment language (only \"participants\"; no diagnosis stated). (2) Unknown — plausible because demographics/health status are not explicitly stated. Winner: Healthy (convention for non-clinical human experiments), Alignment: aligns (inference only). Confidence=0.6 because there are no explicit metadata quotes confirming health status.\nModality top-2: (1) Tactile — supported by \"fixed-intensity pain stimuli\" and \"Participants received laser stimulation\" (nociceptive somatosensory stimulation). (2) Visual — because participants fixate on \"crosshairs displayed on the screen\"; however this is secondary to pain stimulation. Winner: Tactile, Alignment: aligns with few-shot tactile convention. Confidence=0.8 (2+ explicit quotes plus strong few-shot convention match).\nType top-2: (1) Perception — supported by \"low pain\"/\"high pain\" manipulation and repeated \"pain ratings\" / \"rated the intensity of the pain\" indicating measurement of sensory experience. (2) Affect — pain is aversive and could be framed as affective processing, but no emotion/regulation constructs are mentioned. Winner: Perception, Alignment: aligns. Confidence=0.7 (explicit task description supports, but no additional fields/abstract to further confirm research aim wording)."}},"computed_title":"223 By BP","nchans_counts":[{"val":64,"count":669}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":1000.0,"count":669}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-04-22T23:16:00.309185+00:00","total_duration_s":355582.973,"author_year":"Xiangyue2024_223_BP","canonical_name":null}}