Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving01:29

Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving

115
Mechanistic models play a crucial role in algorithms for numerical problem-solving, particularly in nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NMEM). These models aim to minimize specific objective functions by evaluating various parameter estimates, leading to the development of systematic algorithms. In some cases, linearization techniques approximate the model using linear equations.
In individual population analyses, different algorithms are employed, such as Cauchy's method, which uses a...
115
Deductive Reasoning01:16

Deductive Reasoning

61.5K
Deductive reasoning, or deduction, is the type of logic used in hypothesis-based science. In deductive reasoning, the pattern of thinking moves in the opposite direction as compared to inductive reasoning, which means that it uses a general principle or law to predict specific results. From those general principles, a scientist can deduce and predict the specific results that would be valid as long as the general principles are valid.
For example, a researcher can deduce specific predictions...
61.5K
Theorems of Pappus and Guldinus: Problem Solving01:12

Theorems of Pappus and Guldinus: Problem Solving

828
Pappus and Guldinus's theorems are powerful mathematical principles that are used for finding the surface area and volume of composite shapes. For example, consider a cylindrical storage tank with a conical top. Finding the surface area or volume can be challenging for such complex shapes. These theorems are particularly useful in calculating the volume and surface area of such systems. Here, the cylindrical storage tank with a conical top can be broken down into two simple shapes: a...
828
Biot-Savart Law: Problem-Solving00:59

Biot-Savart Law: Problem-Solving

2.9K
The magnitude and direction of a magnetic field created by a steady current can be calculated using the Biot-Savart law.
Consider a mobile phone battery bank as a source of steady current, which flows through the wire connected between the two. What is the magnitude of the magnetic field created by this current at a field point P?
To estimate the magnitude of the total magnetic field, we first consider a small current element of length dl, at a distance r from the field point. Now the following...
2.9K
Castigliano's Theorem: Problem Solving01:14

Castigliano's Theorem: Problem Solving

797
The deflection of a simply supported beam that carries a central point load can be analyzed using structural mechanics principles, particularly by applying Castigliano's theorem. This theorem relates the displacement at the load application point to the partial derivatives of the strain energy in the structure. The simply supported beam with a point load at its center has symmetric reaction forces at the supports, each bearing half of the load. The bending moment at any point along the beam...
797
Higher Mental Functions of the Brain: Language01:10

Higher Mental Functions of the Brain: Language

1.7K
Language is a system of communication that allows the expression of thoughts, ideas, and feelings. The brain processes language in both hemispheres.
Language formation and comprehension take place in the dominant hemisphere. The dominant hemisphere is responsible for understanding the meaning of spoken, written, or sign language, as well as the ability to communicate. For most people, the left hemisphere is the dominant one. The right hemisphere, then, gives tone and emotional context to the...
1.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Are Semantic Representations Stable? A Bayesian Framework Applied to the Study of Quantifier Meaning.

Computational brain & behavior·2026
Same author

Adult learning of a novel quantifier tracks semantic universals.

Cognition·2026
Same author

Autonomous semantics and syntax on-demand in neurocomputational models of language.

Cognitive neuroscience·2025
Same author

The Present and Future of Parallel Architectures of Language and Cognition.

Topics in cognitive science·2025
Same author

Could machine learning help to build a unified theory of cognition?

Nature·2025
Same author

What's left to explain and what's right to conclude about the neurocognition of deductive reasoning?

Brain : a journal of neurology·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 5, 2025

Large Scale Energy Efficient Sensor Network Routing Using a Quantum Processor Unit
05:30

Large Scale Energy Efficient Sensor Network Routing Using a Quantum Processor Unit

Published on: September 8, 2023

706

Computational complexity explains neural differences in quantifier verification.

Heming Strømholt Bremnes1, Jakub Szymanik2, Giosuè Baggio1

  • 1Language Acquisition and Language Processing Lab, Department of Language and Literature, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Cognition
|January 23, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study shows that verifying sentences with complex quantifiers like "most" triggers different brain responses than simpler ones like "all". These differences in electroencephalogram (EEG) signals during verification tasks highlight distinct cognitive processes.

Keywords:
Computational complexityEvent-related potentialsNatural language quantifiersPicture-sentence verificationSemantic automata

More Related Videos

One Dimensional Turing-Like Handshake Test for Motor Intelligence
14:05

One Dimensional Turing-Like Handshake Test for Motor Intelligence

Published on: December 15, 2010

27.9K
Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks
11:18

Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks

Published on: March 2, 2015

10.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 5, 2025

Large Scale Energy Efficient Sensor Network Routing Using a Quantum Processor Unit
05:30

Large Scale Energy Efficient Sensor Network Routing Using a Quantum Processor Unit

Published on: September 8, 2023

706
One Dimensional Turing-Like Handshake Test for Motor Intelligence
14:05

One Dimensional Turing-Like Handshake Test for Motor Intelligence

Published on: December 15, 2010

27.9K
Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks
11:18

Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks

Published on: March 2, 2015

10.5K

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Science
  • Neuroscience
  • Linguistics

Background:

  • Quantifiers in language have varying computational complexities.
  • Proportional quantifiers ('most') are computationally more demanding than nonproportional quantifiers ('all', 'three').
  • The cognitive mechanisms underlying sentence verification and comprehension may differ.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate if differing quantifier complexities influence electroencephalogram (ERP) responses during sentence verification.
  • To determine if these ERP differences persist during sentence comprehension tasks.
  • To explore the relationship between algorithmic complexity and neural processing in language.

Main Methods:

  • Experiment 1 involved participants verifying the truth of sentences with different quantifiers against visual arrays.
  • Experiment 2 used the same stimuli but required participants to answer comprehension questions.
  • Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded throughout both experiments.

Main Results:

  • A truth-value effect was observed, modulated by quantifier class, in sentence-final ERPs during verification.
  • Proportional quantifiers elicited unique sentence-internal positive ERPs compared to nonproportional quantifiers.
  • These quantifier-specific ERP effects vanished during the comprehension task in Experiment 2.

Conclusions:

  • The observed ERP differences are specific to the sentence verification process, not general comprehension.
  • Algorithmic complexity in language processing is reflected in distinct neural signatures.
  • Human language processing adheres to formal computational constraints similar to abstract machines.