MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Orbitofrontal sulci of the human and macaque monkey brain

2000· article· en· W2027403917 on OpenAlexaff
Mary M. Chiavaras, Michael Petrides

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Comparative Neurology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsMacaqueBiologyNeuroscienceOrbitofrontal cortexHuman brainPrefrontal cortexCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigated the orbitofrontal sulci in 100 normal adult human cerebral hemispheres by using magnetic resonance images that were transformed into the standardized proportional stereotaxic space most commonly used, that of Talairach and Tournoux (Talairach and Tournoux [1988]. Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain. New York: Thieme). The patterns formed by the individual sulci were then examined and compared with those of the less convoluted macaque monkey brain. Four sulci forming a similar sulcal pattern were identified in both species. The olfactory sulcus occupies the most medial position forming the lateral border of the gyrus rectus. Lateral to this, the medial, lateral, and transverse orbital sulci form a pattern often resembling an "H," "X," or "K." These sulci divide the orbitofrontal cortex into four major gyri: the medial, lateral, anterior, and posterior orbital gyri. Three major types of sulcal pattern were identified in both species based on the arrangement of these orbital sulci. Additional sulci were observed in the human brain, creating more complex patterns. Probability maps were constructed for the four main orbitofrontal sulci of the human brain. These maps provide a statistical description of the variability of the location of the orbitofrontal sulci within the three-dimensional coordinate system of Talairach and Tournoux (Talairach and Tournoux [1988]. Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain. New York: Thieme). Because these maps may be directly compared with any image transformed into the same standardized space, they provide a valuable tool for identifying and describing the location of functional or structural changes in the orbitofrontal region of the human brain.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations182
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Comparative NeurologySame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207