Language development in a child with left hemispherectomy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A longitudinal study of a left hemispherectomized boy (AB) was conducted to document linguistic evolution and maturation and determine the extent to which right hemisphere processes allow development of language. Resection of the left hemisphere occurred at age 5 years 6 months, following intractable epilepsy. Tests of language comprehension (pointing, understanding of prepositions, understanding of narratives) and production (naming, repetition, lexical diversity, grammatical production) were administered at ages 6:2, 6:4, 6:6, and 6 years 9 months. Observations showed little progress, if any, in most aspects of linguistic performance. In contrast to studies with left-hemispherectomized children, AB showed only a modest expansion of the semantic lexicon and the phonological repertoire more than a year after the surgical intervention. These observations indirectly suggest (1) poor functional involvement of the right hemisphere in the development of adequate linguistic abilities, (2) the necessary integrity of the LH for adequate development of language, or (3) that variations in individual brain maturation rates may account for AB's linguistic progress.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".