{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"6953f4249276ef1ee07a3405","dataset_id":"ds005586","associated_paper_doi":null,"authors":["Cemre Baykan","Alexander C. Schütz"],"bids_version":"1.7.0","contact_info":["Cemre Baykan"],"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":false,"dataset_doi":"doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005586.v2.0.0","datatypes":["eeg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":23,"ages":[23,30,23,19,20,19,44,20,26,20,19,20,21,34,19,25,22,20,22,30,24,20,23],"age_min":19,"age_max":44,"age_mean":23.608695652173914,"species":null,"sex_distribution":{"f":15,"m":8},"handedness_distribution":null},"experimental_modalities":null,"external_links":{"source_url":"https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds005586","osf_url":null,"github_url":null,"paper_url":null},"funding":[],"ingestion_fingerprint":"0905c70a35c5df2942a937d200fe4ab795624d7e67ff5d9e8f3662c7a471479b","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"Electroencephalographic responses to the number of objects in partially occluded and uncovered scenes","readme":"**Passing Viewing Task**\n23 participants took part in this study in return for a monetary incentive at University of Marburg.\nParticipants performed a passive viewing task in a dimly lit room. The visual scene consisted of a game board, game pieces and a mesh as an occluder.\nEach trial started with a fixation cross presentation for one second plus the duration of the drift correction procedure. The game board and occluder were presented for two seconds, while game pieces only appeared in the last one second of this presentation. Following the “partially occluded scene”, the occluder disappeared to uncover the hidden parts of the game board along with the visible game pieces leading to the “uncovered scene” phase. The uncovered scene was presented for one second.\nThe experiment consisted of eight blocks of 80 trials each. There were two conditions of initially visible game pieces: 4 or 32 pieces, each with 8 uncovered conditions: 0, 1, 2, 4, 28, 30, 31 or 32 uncovered game pieces. All 16 conditions were repeated 40 times during the experiment, summing up to 640 trials in total.\nParticipants 9, 10 and 15 were excluded from the analyses due to excessive head movements and equipment malfunction.","recording_modality":["eeg"],"senior_author":"Alexander C. Schütz","sessions":[],"size_bytes":30422094662,"source":"openneuro","study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["PassiveViewing"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-04-22T12:28:38.465446+00:00","dataset_created_at":"2024-10-22T16:19:49.352Z","dataset_modified_at":"2024-10-24T11:57:34.000Z"},"total_files":23,"storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds005586","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","participants.json","participants.tsv","task-PassiveViewing_events.json"]},"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"4a051be509a0e3d0","metadata_hash":"c1983c7e5e3ac7bb","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-01-20T18:31:13.741081+00:00"},"tags":{"pathology":["Healthy"],"modality":["Visual"],"type":["Perception"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.65,"modality":0.85,"type":0.75},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"Most similar few-shot convention is the visual task example (\"Meta-rdk: Preprocessed EEG data\") labeled Modality=Visual and Type=Perception because it uses visually presented stimuli and a perceptual judgment task. Although our dataset is passive viewing (no explicit discrimination response), the core paradigm is still visually evoked processing of scenes/occlusion, which under the catalog conventions maps to Visual + Perception rather than Resting-state. For pathology, multiple few-shots show that when no clinical recruitment is stated, the label is Healthy (e.g., \"EEG: Three armed bandit gambling task\" and \"EEG Motor Movement/Imagery Dataset\").","metadata_analysis":"Key facts from the provided README:\n1) Population: \"23 participants took part in this study ... at University of Marburg.\" (no mention of any diagnosis/clinical recruitment)\n2) Visual stimulus/task: \"Participants performed a passive viewing task\" and \"The visual scene consisted of a game board, game pieces and a mesh as an occluder.\"\n3) Perceptual manipulation: \"Following the 'partially occluded scene', the occluder disappeared to uncover the hidden parts of the game board... leading to the 'uncovered scene' phase.\" Also: \"There were two conditions of initially visible game pieces: 4 or 32 pieces\" with varying \"uncovered game pieces.\"","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information.","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology:\n- Metadata says: \"23 participants took part in this study...\" with no diagnostic terms or patient groups stated.\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: when no clinical recruitment is described, use Healthy.\n- Alignment: ALIGN (metadata lacks pathology; few-shot convention fills with Healthy rather than Unknown).\n\nModality:\n- Metadata says: \"passive viewing task\" and \"The visual scene consisted of a game board...\".\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: visually presented stimuli -> Visual.\n- Alignment: ALIGN.\n\nType:\n- Metadata says: occlusion/uncovering manipulation of a viewed scene (\"partially occluded scene\" -> \"uncovered scene\").\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: sensory processing tasks with visual stimuli (even simple/passive paradigms) map to Perception rather than Resting-state.\n- Alignment: ALIGN (task-based visual perception, not resting).","decision_summary":"Top-2 candidates with head-to-head selection:\n\nPathology:\n1) Healthy (selected): Supported by lack of any clinical recruitment language plus general-participant phrasing: \"23 participants took part in this study\"; typical university study sample.\n2) Unknown (runner-up): Could be considered because the README does not explicitly say \"healthy\".\nDecision: Healthy wins because the dataset clearly describes a non-clinical lab experiment without any disorder-based recruitment (few-shot convention).\nConfidence notes: only indirect evidence (absence of diagnosis terms) -> moderate confidence.\n\nModality:\n1) Visual (selected): \"passive viewing task\"; \"The visual scene consisted of a game board...\"; occluder uncovering is a visual manipulation.\n2) Other (runner-up): Would apply only if stimulus modality were unclear.\nDecision: Visual clearly supported by multiple explicit lines.\nConfidence notes: multiple explicit quotes -> high.\n\nType:\n1) Perception (selected): Core manipulation is visual scene visibility/occlusion (\"partially occluded scene\" vs \"uncovered scene\"; varying numbers of visible/uncovered pieces), indicating sensory/perceptual processing.\n2) Attention (runner-up): Possible if the study were primarily about attentional allocation across scene complexity, but no explicit attention instructions are described beyond fixation.\nDecision: Perception better matches the described passive visual processing paradigm.\nConfidence notes: explicit task description supports perception but no explicit statement of the cognitive construct -> fairly high but not maximal."}},"nemar_citation_count":1,"computed_title":"Electroencephalographic responses to the number of objects in partially occluded and uncovered scenes","nchans_counts":[{"val":63,"count":23}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":1000.0,"count":23}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-04-22T23:16:00.310663+00:00","total_duration_s":120703.237,"author_year":"Baykan2024","canonical_name":null}}