Functional topography of the low postcentral area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: The goal of this study was to establish a reliable method for identification of face and tongue sensory function in the lower central area. METHODS: All positron emission tomography (PET) clinical activation studies performed over a 3-year period at the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital were evaluated by coregistering the PET images with three-dimensional reconstructions of magnetic resonance images obtained in the same patients. In addition to stereotactic coordinates and measurements based on distance from the sylvian fissure, gyral and sulcal landmarks were analyzed to determine their reliability in localizing the sensory areas of the tongue and lower face. The convolutional anatomy of the central area is an important guide to the identification of function. The sensory area of the tongue is recognized as a triangular region at the base of the postcentral gyrus; the sensory area of the lower face resides in the narrowed portion of the postcentral gyrus, immediately above the tongue area. CONCLUSIONS: Cortical landmarks such as the substrata of tongue and face sensory impressions are more reliable guides than stereotactic coordinates or measurements for localizing function.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".