Changes in Taste Intensity Perception Following Anterior Temporal Lobe Removal in Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the role of the anterior temporal lobe in taste perception, we compared taste intensity estimations made by patients who had removal from either the left or the right anterior temporal lobe for the treatment of intractable epilepsy with a group of healthy control subjects. Estimations were made for five concentrations of each of four different tastes, as well as for five cards of varying saturations of gray, which served as a control task. A cross-modal magnitude estimation procedure was employed in which subjects used distance on a measuring tape to reflect intensity estimation. Distances were then transformed into logs, and the slope and the correlation with stimulus concentration or saturation was calculated. Correlation was taken as a measure of accuracy of estimation and slope was taken as a measure of perceived intensity. As predicted, repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant difference between the control group and both patient groups in taste intensity estimations, but not for grayness, reflecting the importance of the anterior temporal lobe in low-level gustatory but not visual perception. Additionally, repeated measures ANOVA for slopes indicated that subjects in the right temporal group rated the bitter taste as more intense than did subjects in other groups, possibly reflecting increased intensity perception of the unpleasant bitter taste.
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".