Architectonic analysis of the human retrosplenial cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The architecture of the macaque retrosplenial cortex, including its posteroventral extension around and below the splenium of the corpus callosum, was recently characterized (Morris et al. [1999a] Eur. J. Neurosci. 11:2506-2518.). This analysis was made possible by sectioning the posterior cingulate gyrus radially, i.e., in planes that were orthogonal to its line of curvature and that, therefore, preserved the laminar organization of this region. The aim of the present study was to examine the architecture and the limits of the human retrosplenial cortex. Cross sections through the entire posterior cingulate gyrus were obtained by applying the sectioning technique developed in the monkey, so that an explicit comparison could be made between the architecture of the human and the monkey retrosplenial cortex. The present analysis revealed that, as is the case in the macaque brain, the human retrosplenial cortex is composed of granular areas 29a-c and d, and dysgranular/agranular area 30. The human retrosplenial cortex, like that of the macaque monkey, runs, as an arch, around the splenium of the corpus callosum. In the macaque brain, the retrosplenial cortex remains buried within the callosal sulcus throughout its entire course around the splenium. In the human brain, however, the posteroventral segment of the retrosplenial cortex extends on the medial wall of the cerebral hemisphere to encompass most of the cortical region commonly referred to as the "isthmus of the cingulate gyrus."
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".