ArticleNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Subword Representations Successfully Decode Brain Responses to Morphologically Complex Written Words.
Article in Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study extends the idea of decoding word-evoked brain activations using a corpus-semantic vector space to multimorphemic words in the agglutinative Finnish language. The corpus-semantic models are trained on word segments, and decoding is carried out with word vectors that are composed of these segments. We tested several alternative vector-space models using different segmentations: no segmentation (whole word), linguistic morphemes, statistical morphemes, random segmentation, and character-level 1-, 2- and 3-grams, and paired them with recorded MEG responses to multimorphemic words in a visual word recognition task. For all variants, the decoding accuracy exceeded the standard word-label permutation-based significance thresholds at 350-500 ms after stimulus onset. However, the critical segment-label permutation test revealed that only those segmentations that were morphologically aware reached significance in the brain decoding task. The results suggest that both whole-word forms and morphemes are represented in the brain and show that neural decoding using corpus-semantic word representations derived from compositional subword segments is applicable also for multimorphemic word forms. This is especially relevant for languages with complex morphology, because a large proportion of word forms are rare and it can be difficult to find statistically reliable surface representations for them in any large corpus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.