Sensory and Motor Interhemispheric Integration after Section of Different Portions of the Anterior Corpus Callosum in Nonepileptic Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated somatosensory and motor interhemispheric integration in four patients who underwent transection of different portions of the anterior corpus callosum (CC) for removal of an intraventricular cyst. The study goal was to relate their performances to the topographical organization of the CC. METHODS: Experimental tasks included bimanual coordination, tactile cross-localization, and intermanual and interfield comparisons of somesthetic information. Response accuracy and response times were measured. In addition, interhemispheric transmission times were obtained in the somesthetic modality. RESULTS: Section of the middle portion of the genu caused a deficit in motor coordination, which was absent in patients with more posteriorly located lesions, whereas section of more rostral portions of the genu seemed to interfere with motor planning. The most posterior section in our sample, including the anterior portion of the body of the corpus, abolished interhemispheric transfer of simple somesthetic information (perception of touch) but not tactile discrimination (intermanual comparisons of shapes). We speculate that more complex somesthetic information is transferred through the caudal region of the body of the CC, which was spared in all patients. Thus, it seems that section of different portions of the anterior CC (genu and anterior body) produces specific deficits in interhemispheric integration in the motor and somesthetic modalities. These deficits are consistent with the anteroposterior topography of anterior callosal fibers. CONCLUSION: The specific disconnections deficits observed in this study may provide the surgeon with information regarding the consequences of anterior callosotomy and allow for remedial measures to be implemented if required.
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".