{"CAPTION FIG1.png": "'Figure 1: Participants in our pilot study showed higher levels of cognitive effort during system-inferred impasses (green bars) compared to system-inferred productive ideation (red bars), as indicated by lower levels of \\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\)HlbR (in micromolars, \\\\(\\\\blacklozenge\\\\)**M**) in regions of the prefrontal cortex (measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy).\\n\\n'", "CAPTION TAB2.png": "'\\n\\n\\\\begin{table}\\n\\\\begin{tabular}{l l'", "CAPTION FIG2.png": "'Figure 2. Participants generated ideas more slowly just before and impasse compared to other points in their ideation session.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIG3.png": "\"\\n\\n**Figure 3. Summary of model-adjusted mean contrasts across dependent measures for each inspiration condition against the non-stimuli baseline condition (vertical dashed lines). Mean contrasts are reported on the original scale of the dependent measure. Error bars are 95% confidence intervals. Significant contrasts from the no-stimuli baseline (by Dunnett's t-test) are shown in orange. Contrasts that support a theory's prediction are marked green; contrasts that contradict (i.e., go in the opposite direction of) a theory's prediction are marked red. Here, SIAM's predictions for the always-far (for _inter-idea interval_, _transition similarity_), always-near (for _inter-idea interval_, _transition similarity_, _fluency_), and mismatch-state conditions (for _inter-idea interval_) are supported, while the associationist theory's predictions for always-near is contradicted (for _novelty_).**\"", "CAPTION TAB1.png": "'\\n\\n\\\\begin{table}\\n\\\\begin{tabular}{l l} \\\\hline \\\\hline \\\\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \\\\multicolumn{1}{c}{} \\\\\\\\ \\\\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \\\\multicolumn{1}\\n\\n'"}