Skip to content
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
77 changes: 77 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/STRUCTURE.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
# Structure — TiCS Forum Review

Built by the `manuscript:manuscript-formatting` skill (v0.5.0) in v2 Phase 1. This document maps each file to the *Trends in Cognitive Sciences* (TiCS, Cell Press) Forum Review submission element it serves. The next phase (`manuscript:manuscript-writing`) fills the placeholders.

## Files and TiCS compliance map

| File | TiCS element | Word budget | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| `frontmatter.yaml` | Title, authors, affiliations, corresponding author, ORCID | n/a | Per skill's "Title page" checklist item |
| `highlights.md` | Highlights | 3-5 bullets, <=85 chars each | TiCS / Cell Press convention |
| `abstract.md` | Abstract | ~80-120 words, no citations | TiCS abstract limit |
| `sections/01_introduction.md` | Section 1: Introduction (the per-shot turn) | ~450 | |
| `sections/02_scaffold.md` | Section 2: Four-perspective scaffold | ~600 | |
| `sections/03_psychophysics.md` | Section 3: Psychophysics (bottom-up floor) | ~500 | |
| `sections/04_action.md` | Section 4: Action (mu-band ERD and event segmentation) | ~500 | |
| `sections/05_language.md` | Section 5: Language (5a non-transfer + 5b silent-narrative) | ~600 | I5 split applied |
| `sections/06_emotion.md` | Section 6: Emotion (two latency-distinct predictions) | ~500 | |
| `sections/07_synthesis.md` | Section 7: Synthesis (integration, falsifiability, open questions) | ~450 | F4/F5 applied |
| `boxes/box1_anchor.md` | Box 1 (HBN-EEG R3 anchor cohort) | ~180 | F4 anchor case rebuilt |
| `boxes/trends.md` | Trends Box (recent developments) | ~200-250 | TiCS convention |
| `boxes/outstanding-questions.md` | Outstanding Questions Box | 5-7 questions | TiCS convention |
| `glossary.md` | Glossary | 10-15 terms | TiCS convention |
| `figures.md` | Figure legends | ~400 (not in main count) | 4 figures planned (Phase 3) |
| `references.md` | References | 80-120 entries | Cell Press numbered (Vancouver-like) |
| `refs.bib` | Source BibTeX | 94 entries | Already built (Phase 1) |

## Main-text budget total

Sections 1-7: ~3610 words. Inside the TiCS Forum Review ~3500-4000-word ceiling.

## Submission checklist (from `manuscript:manuscript-formatting` SKILL.md)

This section tracks the submission checklist items the skill enumerates. Each item is marked with the phase that will satisfy it.

- [ ] **Manuscript formatted per journal template** — Phase 5 (final assembly via the formatting skill again)
- [x] **Title page: title, authors, affiliations, corresponding author, ORCID** — `frontmatter.yaml` (Phase 1; placeholders to be filled by author)
- [ ] **Abstract within word limit** — Phase 2 (manuscript-writing produces; Phase 5 verifies)
- [ ] **Keywords provided (if required)** — TiCS does not require keywords for Forum Reviews; not applicable
- [ ] **Main text within page/word limit** — Phase 2 budget + Phase 5 verification
- [ ] **Figures as separate high-resolution files (typically 300+ DPI)** — Phase 3 via `figures:scientific-figure` composer
- [ ] **Figure captions in a separate list** — `figures.md` (Phase 2 drafts; Phase 5 finalises)
- [ ] **Tables formatted per journal style** — no tables planned for this review
- [x] **References complete and consistently formatted** — `refs.bib` built (Phase 1); numbering applied in Phase 5
- [ ] **Supplementary materials prepared separately** — none planned
- [ ] **Cover letter drafted** — Phase 5 (skill's cover-letter template, then humanizer pass)
- [ ] **`manuscript:humanizer` natural-writing pass** — Phase 4
- [ ] **Conflict of interest statement** — Phase 5 (author-provided)
- [ ] **Data availability statement** — Phase 5 (HBN-EEG R3 is public; statement noted in Phase 5)
- [ ] **Ethics approval statement** — n/a (review article; no new data)
- [ ] **Author contributions (CRediT format if required)** — Phase 5
- [ ] **Suggested reviewers** — Phase 5 (author-provided)

## TiCS scaffolding decisions not covered by the skill

The skill provides a generic IMRAD framework plus journal-specific templates for IEEE / Nature / PNAS / PLoS ONE / Elsevier. TiCS (Cell Press) Forum Reviews use a non-IMRAD structure that the skill does not enumerate explicitly. The following TiCS-specific decisions are applied on top of the skill's framework based on public TiCS author guidelines:

- **No IMRAD.** TiCS Forum Reviews use thematic sections, not Introduction/Methods/Results/Discussion. The seven sections here are thematic (Introduction, Scaffold, Psychophysics, Action, Language, Emotion, Synthesis).
- **Highlights**: 3-5 short bullets at the top, each <=85 characters (Cell Press / Elsevier house style enforced via the skill's Elsevier checklist row).
- **Trends Box**: a callout box listing recent developments that make the topic timely.
- **Outstanding Questions Box**: 5-7 forward-looking research questions.
- **Glossary**: 10-15 defined terms accessible to non-specialist readers.

## Carry-forwards from v1 self-review

From `direction-papers/movie-ersp-direction-review.md` (kept in the project for reference):

- **F1 (Category G cardinality 12 -> 7)**: Section 5a will state "all seven Category G cards (and 12 cards corpus-wide) carry `transfer-to-silent: no`".
- **F2 (Schubring vs Codispoti DOI)**: `refs.bib` header documents; body prose cites Codispoti.
- **F3 (stray refs)**: 3 stray keys removed from `refs.bib` (already applied).
- **F4 (anchor case)**: Section 7.2 + Box 1 rebuild around Petroni-Cohen 2018 + partly-validated pipeline.
- **F5 (falsifiability)**: Section 7.3 names a topographic-and-band rejection region.
- **I1-I5**: handled in the per-section placeholders.
- **S2 (italicised *The Present*)**: enforced throughout via copy-edit.

## Next phase

`manuscript:manuscript-writing` is invoked per section file. Each invocation will receive the placeholders here, the source material under `direction-papers/` and `research/`, and the TiCS section budget for that file.
16 changes: 16 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/abstract.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
<!-- TiCS Abstract. ~80-120 words. No in-text citations. Filled by
manuscript:manuscript-writing in v2 Phase 2. -->

# Abstract

[Opening sentence: the field has moved from whole-clip ISC to event-locked methods.]

[Sentence 2: most empirical evidence is adult fMRI / iEEG / scalp-EEG ISC; per-shot ERSP in a developmental cohort viewing silent character animation has no precedent.]

[Sentence 3: we review the four-perspective corpus that constrains the design space.]

[Sentence 4: psychophysics, action, language, and emotion make divergent and partly-falsifiable predictions about the 0 to 500 ms post-shot-onset window.]

[Closing sentence: HBN-EEG Release 3 viewing *The Present* (Pixar 2014) sits at this empty intersection; the 100 Hz local working set caps beta-band claims until a 500 Hz validation pass.]

<!-- Verify <= 120 words at Phase 5. -->
18 changes: 18 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/boxes/box1_anchor.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
<!-- Box 1: HBN-EEG R3 anchor cohort. Budget: ~180 words.
Filled by manuscript:manuscript-writing in v2 Phase 2.

Carry-forwards from v1 self-review:
- F4 (anchor case): descriptive surface attributes live here, NOT as evidential support for the direction.
-->

# Box 1: HBN-EEG Release 3 as the anchor cohort

[Paragraph (~180 words). Describe the HBN-EEG R3 cohort:
- 5-21-year-old participants in a developmental research setting.
- 128-channel HydroCel Geodesic Sensor Net.
- Passive viewing of the 3.5-minute Pixar short *The Present* (2014).
- Local working set: 184 subjects at 100 Hz BDF (Nyquist-aware downsample of original 500 Hz).
- 56 stimulus-side shots with per-shot `onset`, `duration`, `LLR`, `has_boy`, `has_puppy` annotations.
- After invalidating 3 high-drift rows (`match_diff_s > 1.0 s`), 49 trusted rows: 20 boy-only + 15 puppy-only shots for mutually exclusive single-agent contrast.
- Pipeline: BIDS import, 1 Hz HPF, conditional cleanline (gated by Nyquist), `clean_rawdata` channel rejection, AMICA, ICLabel (brain threshold 0.69), dipfit5, std_precomp ERSP.
- F4 carry-forward statement: the anchor case rests on Petroni-Cohen 2018 (external precedent) + this partly-validated pipeline (internal feasibility). The six-feature uniqueness conjunction is *descriptive*, not evidential.]
22 changes: 22 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/boxes/outstanding-questions.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
<!-- Outstanding Questions Box. 5-7 forward-looking research questions.
TiCS convention; not in the manuscript-formatting SKILL.md.
Filled by manuscript:manuscript-writing in v2 Phase 2.
-->

# Outstanding Questions Box

[Budget: 5-7 questions. Each question is one sentence; forward-looking; adjudicates between perspectives or names a gap the field could fill.

1. [Q1: per-shot ERSP in developmental cohort survives LLR and motion-energy partialling at 0-500 ms?]

2. [Q2: mu-band ERD over central rolandic clusters elicited by animated-character action observation as it is by adult hand-action observation?]

3. [Q3: cuteness-driven affective response in children produces a sub-second EEG signature distinguishable from generic arousal? And is the signature compatible with frontal asymmetry at sub-second timescales given reliability concerns?]

4. [Q4: can the topographic-and-band rejection region for the four-perspective ranking be pre-registered before group analysis? Is the central-rolandic vs frontal-asymmetric vs language-network discrimination operationalisable from EEG IC clusters?]

5. [Q5: can a multimodal vision-language embedding regressor substitute for language-model surprisal on silent stimuli?]

6. [Q6: does within-stimulus narrative position (three-act trajectory) explain condition-level effects that survive low-level partialling in single-stimulus designs?]

7. [Q7: residual saccade-locked variance contamination without synchronous eye tracker, and the cohort size at which ICA-only artifact rejection becomes sufficient?]]
20 changes: 20 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/boxes/trends.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
<!-- Trends Box. ~200-250 words. Recent developments that make the topic timely.
TiCS convention; not in the manuscript-formatting SKILL.md but is required for TiCS Forum Reviews.
Filled by manuscript:manuscript-writing in v2 Phase 2.
-->

# Trends Box: recent developments enabling the per-shot framing

[Budget: ~200-250 words. Bullet list of 5-7 recent developments.

- **Whole-brain shot-cut response in adult intracranial EEG.** Nentwich et al. 2023: 6328 contacts in 23 patients across 43.6 minutes of film clips; triple-regressor against optical-flow magnitude, saccade onsets, and film-cut onsets; whole-brain saccade- and cut-locked responses with motion concentrated in occipitoparietal cortex.

- **Hidden-Markov-model recovery of event states from fMRI.** Baldassano et al. 2017: hierarchy of event boundaries from Sherlock-movie fMRI; hippocampal boundary signals predict subsequent free recall.

- **Cross-sectional developmental EEG-ISC.** Petroni et al. 2018: whole-clip EEG-ISC reliability across ages 6-44 during passive viewing of six naturalistic videos, peaking in childhood.

- **Silent abstract animation for MRI compliance.** Vanderwal et al. 2015: Inscapes, used by HBN itself; reliable network-level activity from a silent stimulus.

- **Multi-level cinematic-feature regression.** Kauttonen et al. 2015: multi-level cinematic features regressed against fMRI ISC; methodological template for shot-level feature annotation.

- **Open developmental EEG releases.** HBN-EEG and Studyforrest (Hanke et al. 2014) make large-N developmental datasets available for naturalistic-stimulus analysis at unprecedented scale.]
31 changes: 31 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/figures.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
<!-- Figure legends. ~400 words total (not counted in main text).
Figures themselves are built in v2 Phase 3 via /figures:scientific-figure composer.
Figure legends drafted by manuscript:manuscript-writing in v2 Phase 2.
-->

# Figure legends

## Figure 1. Four-perspective strand map

[Caption placeholder. Compose in Phase 2 after the Phase 3 figure-qa report is in. Reference the four perspectives, the 15 corpus themes, the colour code (Okabe-Ito), and the legend's redundant shape-and-colour encoding.]

## Figure 2. Naturalness gradient and developmental cohort coverage

[Caption placeholder. X-axis: stimulus naturalness gradient. Y-axis: participant cohort. Markers: size by number of corpus cards, shape by modality. Highlight the (child, character animation, EEG ERSP) empty cell.]

## Figure 3. Gap matrix

[Caption placeholder. 8 named gaps from `research/synthesis/gap-analysis.md` versus 4 prior-effort axes. Filled cells contain representative card slugs; empty cells highlighted.]

## Figure 4. Predictions and falsification regions, per perspective

[Caption placeholder. Each perspective (row) gives topography (with head schematic), band, latency, pre-registered falsification region. Reference the F5 carry-forward.]

## Figure assembly notes (for Phase 3)

- **Composer**: `/figures:scientific-figure` (multi-panel; the recommended composer per its skill description).
- **Panel sources**:
- `/figures:svg-figure` for the matrix-style schematic panels (Figs 1, 3).
- `/figures:transparent-icons` for stimulus thumbnails (Fig 2 x-axis: gratings, photographs, Heider-Simmel triangles, abstract animation, character animation, live-action film) and brain-topo icons (Fig 4 topography column).
- `/figures:plot-styling` only if any panel needs data plotting; the current 4 figures are conceptual schematics, so it may not be needed.
- **QA**: `/figures:figure-qa` on every panel and on the composed figure. Address all findings before completion. No deferrals.
42 changes: 42 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/frontmatter.yaml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
# TiCS Forum Review — frontmatter.
#
# Built by manuscript:manuscript-formatting in v2 Phase 1.
# Matches the skill's "Title page" submission-checklist item.

title: "Per-shot EEG during naturalistic film: a four-perspective developmental review"
short_title: "Per-shot EEG in development"
article_type: "Forum Review"
target_journal: "Trends in Cognitive Sciences"

authors:
- name: "Seyed Yahya Shirazi"
affiliation: 1
email: "shirazi@ieee.org"
orcid: "" # to be filled by author
corresponding: true

affiliations:
- id: 1
name: "Open Science Collective"

keywords: [] # TiCS Forum Reviews do not require keywords; left empty intentionally

status: "v2 Phase 1 scaffold (manuscript-formatting)"
date: "2026-05-20"

# Word budget map (TiCS Forum Review)
word_budget:
main_text: 4000 # ceiling
abstract: 120 # ceiling
highlights_chars_per_bullet: 85
references_target_low: 80
references_target_high: 120
figures_min: 3
figures_max: 5

# Compliance flags for Phase 5 verification
compliance:
no_em_dashes: true
no_emojis: true
abbreviations_defined_on_first_use: true
italicise_film_titles: true
38 changes: 38 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/glossary.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
<!-- Glossary. 10-15 defined terms. Each definition <=50 words.
TiCS convention; not in the manuscript-formatting SKILL.md but is required for TiCS Forum Reviews.
Filled by manuscript:manuscript-writing in v2 Phase 2.
-->

# Glossary

[Each entry follows the pattern: **Term (acronym if any).** Definition sentence(s), <=50 words.]

**Event-related spectral perturbation (ERSP).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Inter-subject correlation (ISC).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Log luminance ratio (LLR).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Adaptive mixture independent component analysis (AMICA).** [Definition placeholder.]

**IC classification (ICLabel).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Mu rhythm.** [Definition placeholder.]

**Event-related desynchronisation (ERD).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Frontal alpha asymmetry.** [Definition placeholder.]

**Default-mode network (DMN).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Theory of mind (ToM).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Temporal response function (TRF).** [Definition placeholder.]

**Baby schema.** [Definition placeholder.]

**Naturalistic stimulus.** [Definition placeholder.]

**Event segmentation.** [Definition placeholder.]

**Temporal receptive window.** [Definition placeholder.]
11 changes: 11 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/highlights.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
<!-- TiCS Highlights. 3-5 bullets. Each <=85 characters. Per Cell Press / Elsevier
house style. Verified at Phase 5. Filled by manuscript:manuscript-writing
in v2 Phase 2. -->

# Highlights

- [bullet 1: 1-line claim about the per-shot turn in naturalistic EEG]
- [bullet 2: 1-line claim that four perspectives diverge in their per-shot predictions]
- [bullet 3: 1-line claim about LM-regressor non-transfer to silent stimuli]
- [bullet 4: 1-line claim about the developmental empty-cell]
- [bullet 5: 1-line claim about HBN-EEG R3 as the testbed]
21 changes: 21 additions & 0 deletions manuscript/narrative-review/references.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
<!-- References. Numbered Cell Press style.
Sources: refs.bib (94 entries).
Built in Phase 5 by extracting cited keys from the assembled manuscript in order of first appearance, then formatting per Cell Press house style.
-->

# References

[Cell Press numbered references go here in Phase 5 final assembly. Format per Cell Press house style (numbered, Vancouver-like).

Build process:
1. Concatenate per-section files plus boxes plus glossary into a single body text.
2. Extract `[CiteKey]` references in order of first appearance.
3. Map each key to its `refs.bib` entry.
4. Emit a numbered list using Cell Press format.
5. Replace `[CiteKey]` and `[Key1; Key2]` in the body with `[N]` and `[N,M]` respectively.

The `refs.bib` file (94 entries) is the source of truth.]

## Note on F2 carry-forward (Schubring vs Codispoti)

The body cites the alpha-band-and-emotion review under "Codispoti and colleagues (2023), Psychophysiology, DOI 10.1111/psyp.14438". The BibTeX key is `Codispoti2023AlphabandOA`. The internal corpus slug `schubring-schupp-2023-alpha-emotion` is retained inside `research/collection/emotion/` for stable cross-references and does not appear in published prose.
Loading
Loading