Study 1 — Observational EEG: Candidate Dynamical Signature of Report-Boundary Contrast (Seen vs. Unseen) Under Visual Masking
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) August 23, 2026 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22070648 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Preregistration Preregistered Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Measures | Perceptual Awareness Scale |
| Key points | The preregistration specifies a hypothesis that a debiased Weighted Phase-Lag Index between electrodes F4 and P4 in the 10–12 Hz band during 200–400 ms post-stimulus will discriminate Seen from Unseen report conditions. It explicitly states that a successful result would not establish phenomenal consciousness, a causal bridge, or synthetic consciousness. |
Abstract
This preregistration specifies Study 1 of the Amaya Consciousness Research Program: an observational EEG study testing whether a preregistered dynamical variable can discriminate a specified Seen-versus-Unseen report boundary under physically matched visual-masking conditions. The primary variable is debiased Weighted Phase-Lag Index (wPLI) between electrodes F4 and P4 in the fixed 10–12 Hz frequency band during the 200–400 ms post-stimulus window. Individual alpha peak frequency is measured only as a prespecified sensitivity covariate and does not modify the primary frequency band. The study uses a predefined Perceptual Awareness Scale and treats subjective report as an observable report-boundary condition rather than as proof of phenomenal experience. The protocol includes preregistered Bayesian stopping boundaries, nuisance controls, blinded analysis, automated preprocessing, data-integrity hashing, and a non-conscious synthetic countermodel. The candidate hypothesis is that the specified dynamical variable discriminates Seen from Unseen report conditions. The null hypothesis permits the observed difference to arise from ordinary physiological, computational, statistical, or measurement mechanisms. The study explicitly preserves the epistemic distinction R_t ≠ Q_t. A successful result would not establish phenomenal consciousness, establish X = Q, establish a causal bridge Γ*: X → Q, establish synthetic consciousness, or constitute proof that consciousness exists. No human data have been collected as of this preregistration. Human data collection requires appropriate ethics/IRB approval and informed consent before collection. Notebook 22 reached a final preregistration audit status of 39/39 checks passed. The final Paper 13 Study 1 archival package was subsequently hash-reconciled before publication. This record preserves the preregistration and associated research-verification artifacts as an open research record. It does not represent a claim that consciousness has been established.