These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37880511)

  • 1. Cloze probability, predictability ratings, and computational estimates for 205 English sentences, aligned with existing EEG and reading time data.
    de Varda AG; Marelli M; Amenta S
    Behav Res Methods; 2023 Oct; ():. PubMed ID: 37880511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Language Models Explain Word Reading Times Better Than Empirical Predictability.
    Hofmann MJ; Remus S; Biemann C; Radach R; Kuchinke L
    Front Artif Intell; 2021; 4():730570. PubMed ID: 35187472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Monitoring in language perception: The effect of misspellings of words in highly constrained sentences.
    Vissers CTWM; Chwilla DJ; Kolk HHJ
    Brain Res; 2006 Aug; 1106(1):150-163. PubMed ID: 16843443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Morphosyntactic but not lexical corpus-based probabilities can substitute for cloze probabilities in reading experiments.
    Lopukhina A; Lopukhin K; Laurinavichyute A
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(1):e0246133. PubMed ID: 33508029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Prediction at the intersection of sentence context and word form: Evidence from eye-movements and self-paced reading.
    Amenta S; Hasenäcker J; Crepaldi D; Marelli M
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2023 Jun; 30(3):1081-1092. PubMed ID: 36510092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Prior Context and Individual Alpha Frequency Influence Predictive Processing during Language Comprehension.
    Jano S; Cross Z; Chatburn A; Schlesewsky M; Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2024 May; ():1-39. PubMed ID: 38820550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Strong Prediction: Language Model Surprisal Explains Multiple N400 Effects.
    Michaelov JA; Bardolph MD; Van Petten CK; Bergen BK; Coulson S
    Neurobiol Lang (Camb); 2024; 5(1):107-135. PubMed ID: 38645623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Lack of contextual-word predictability during reading in patients with mild Alzheimer disease.
    Fernández G; Manes F; Rotstein NP; Colombo O; Mandolesi P; Politi LE; Agamennoni O
    Neuropsychologia; 2014 Sep; 62():143-51. PubMed ID: 25080188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Neural Bases of Predictions During Natural Reading of Known Statements: An Electroencephalography and Eye Movements Co-registration Study.
    Bianchi B; Loredo R; Fonseca MD; Carden J; Jaichenco V; von der Malsburg T; Shalom DE; Kamienkowski J
    Neuroscience; 2023 May; 519():131-146. PubMed ID: 37003544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Lexical Predictability During Natural Reading: Effects of Surprisal and Entropy Reduction.
    Lowder MW; Choi W; Ferreira F; Henderson JM
    Cogn Sci; 2018 Jun; 42 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):1166-1183. PubMed ID: 29442360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dissociating word frequency and predictability effects in reading: Evidence from coregistration of eye movements and EEG.
    Kretzschmar F; Schlesewsky M; Staub A
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2015 Nov; 41(6):1648-62. PubMed ID: 26010829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Coregistration of eye movements and EEG in natural reading: analyses and review.
    Dimigen O; Sommer W; Hohlfeld A; Jacobs AM; Kliegl R
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2011 Nov; 140(4):552-72. PubMed ID: 21744985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Predictability and novelty in literal language comprehension: an ERP study.
    Davenport T; Coulson S
    Brain Res; 2011 Oct; 1418():70-82. PubMed ID: 21925647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Predictability and decomposability separately contribute to compositional processing of idiomatic language.
    Hubbard R; Bulkes N; Lai VT
    Psychophysiology; 2023 Aug; 60(8):e14269. PubMed ID: 36762757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of Structural Parsers and Neural Language Models as Surprisal Estimators.
    Oh BD; Clark C; Schuler W
    Front Artif Intell; 2022; 5():777963. PubMed ID: 35310956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Limits on lexical prediction during reading.
    Luke SG; Christianson K
    Cogn Psychol; 2016 Aug; 88():22-60. PubMed ID: 27376659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Individual Differences in Reading Speed are Linked to Variability in the Processing of Lexical and Contextual Information: Evidence from Single-trial Event-related Brain Potentials.
    Payne B; Federmeier KD
    Word (N Y : 1945); 2019; 65(4):252-272. PubMed ID: 33692598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Measuring local context as context-word probabilities.
    Hahn LW
    Behav Res Methods; 2012 Jun; 44(2):344-60. PubMed ID: 21960060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The role of preview validity in predictability and frequency effects on eye movements in reading.
    Staub A; Goddard K
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2019 Jan; 45(1):110-127. PubMed ID: 29648870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The ERP response to the amount of information conveyed by words in sentences.
    Frank SL; Otten LJ; Galli G; Vigliocco G
    Brain Lang; 2015 Jan; 140():1-11. PubMed ID: 25461915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.