MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071056722 · doi:10.1111/ejn.12252

The adaptive aging brain: evidence from the preservation of communication abilities with age

2013· review· en· W2071056722 on OpenAlexaff
Jennyfer Ansado, Yannick Marsolais, Ikram Methqal, Flamine Alary, Yves Joanette

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionPsychologyNeuroimagingCognitive agingNeuroscienceCognitive psychologySet (abstract data type)Task (project management)Brain agingProcess (computing)Functional neuroimagingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurofunctional reorganization with age is suspected to occur for many cognitive components including communication abilities. Several functional neuroimaging studies of elderly individuals have reported the occurrence of an interhemispheric neurofunctional reorganization characterized by more bilateral activation patterns. Other studies have indicated that the preservation of some other cognitive abilities is associated with some intrahemispheric reorganization following either a posterior-anterior or an anterior-posterior shift in aging. Interestingly, other studies have shown that age-related neurofunctional reorganization is task-load-dependent. Taken together, these studies suggest that neurofunctional reorganization in aging is based on a more dynamic, flexible and adaptive neurofunctional process than previously proposed. This review summarizes the different factors that are thought to support the preservation of the semantic processing of words in aging, and highlights a multidetermined and complex set of processes such as the nature of the specific cognitive processes, task complexity and cognitive strategy, characterizing the neurofunctional reorganization in aging that allows for optimal cognitive abilities. In so doing, it provides the background for future study looking at the neurofunctional dimensions of the impact of neurodegenerative diseases on cognitive abilities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.391
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.021 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations44
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207