MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Local Morphology Predicts Functional Organization of the Dorsal Premotor Region in the Human Brain

2006· article· en· W2023452161 on OpenAlexafffund
Céline Amiez, Penelope Kostopoulos, Anne-Sophie Champod, Michael Petrides

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFondation Fyssen
KeywordsPremotor cortexNeuroscienceIntraparietal sulcusPsychologySupplementary eye fieldFunctional magnetic resonance imagingFrontal eye fieldsDorsumSulcusFrontal lobeHuman brainFunctional specializationFunctional organizationEye movementBrain mappingFunctional imagingSuperior temporal sulcusCentral sulcusMotor cortexAnatomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A confusing picture of the functional organization of the dorsal premotor region of the human brain emerged when functional neuroimaging studies that either examined visuomotor hand conditional activity or attempted to localize the human frontal eye field reported activity increases at the same general location, namely the junction of the superior precentral sulcus with the superior frontal sulcus. The present functional magnetic resonance imaging study examined visuomotor hand conditional activity and the locus of the frontal eye field as defined by a standard task, on a subject-by-subject basis, to clarify their location and reveal relationships between the pattern of local morphology and functional activity. The results demonstrate that visuomotor hand conditional activity and the frontal eye field lie within distinct parts of the superior precentral sulcus, revealing an organization of the human premotor cortex consistent with that observed in experimental studies in the monkey.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations195
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207