A Cognitive Neuropsychological Examination of the Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System Subtests: A Report of Three Stroke Cases Studied Longitudinally During Recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study three patients with unilateral focalized stroke lesions were examined longitudinally on the CAS subtests at 1 month and 6 months postinfarct such that each patient functioned as baseline. Patient 1 with a left temporal pole lesion had a severe syntactic comprehension deficit on Sentence Questions. Patient 2 had a rare right anterior cerebral artery (ACA) aneurysm culminating in a classical orbitofrontal syndrome and impairments on Expressive Attention, Word Series as well as a previously undescribed praxis-based figure ground reversal phenomenon on Figure Memory. Patient 3 suffered a right frontoparietal lesion with resulting representational as well as elements of motor neglect and impairments on Matching Numbers, Number Detection, and Receptive Attention. The three patient's lesions were all entirely consistent with the nature of cognitive neuropsychological symptoms suggesting that the CAS subtests are not only unique but also sensitive and specific to focalized cortical lesions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".