Functional role of the basal ganglia in the planning and execution of actions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Recent studies of functional brain imaging have shown the involvement of the basal ganglia in executive processes such as planning and set-shifting. However, the specific contributions of the striatum in those processes remain unknown. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that the caudate nucleus is primarily involved in the preparation of a novel action and not in set-shifting per se. METHODS: In the present event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, a new task was developed that permitted, for the first time, to distinguish between shifts in classification when the rule is implicitly given by the task from shifts that require cognitive comparison and planning. RESULTS: Significantly increased activity in the caudate nucleus and the putamen was observed only in conditions in which cognitive planning was required to perform a set-shift, whereas significant activation was seen in the subthalamic nucleus (another region of the basal ganglia) in all shifting conditions whether or not planning was required. INTERPRETATION: We suggest that the caudate nucleus and the putamen are particularly important, respectively, in the planning and the execution of a self-generated novel action, whereas the subthalamic nucleus may be required when a new motor program is solicited independently of the choice of strategy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".