Encoding touch and the orbitofrontal cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lesion studies on nonhuman primates utilizing recognition memory tests have shown that the orbitofrontal cortex is critical for the encoding of novel information, and anatomical studies have shown that the orbitofrontal cortex forms part of a mnemonic circuit that connects limbic medial temporal areas with higher-order lateral frontal cortical regions. Furthermore, functional neuroimaging studies have demonstrated increased activity in the orbitofrontal cortex of the human brain during the encoding of novel visual and auditory information. The present positron emission tomography study examined brain activity related to the encoding of tactile information. Cerebral blood flow (CBF) in normal human subjects during the tactile exploration of novel stimuli from a related set of textures and patterns, as well as from a set of aversive tactile stimuli, was compared with CBF during a control condition involving familiar tactile stimuli. The results demonstrate that the right rostral orbitofrontal cortex is involved in the active encoding of novel tactile information, while a more caudal region of the orbitofrontal cortex, which is more closely connected with limbic and autonomic regions of the brain, was activated when subjects explored novel aversive tactile stimuli. These results suggest that the orbitofrontal cortex, through its connections with the limbic areas of the medial temporal lobe, influences the processing of incoming information and thus contributes to its encoding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".