MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2523924398 · doi:10.71781/30291

Origine des projections sensorimotrices dans des sous-régions du cortex moteur primaire chez le singe capucin

2015· dissertation· fr· W2523924398 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Melvin K. Dea

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2015
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Certaines études ont démontrés que les connexions entre l’aire prémotrice ventrale (PMv) et la région de la main du cortex moteur primaire (M1) sont distribuées non-uniformément, ciblant des sous-régions spécifiques dans M1. Dans la présente étude nous avons voulu développer ces résultats en étudiant la distribution au sein de M1 des projections corticales issues de PMv, l’aire prémotrice dorsale (PMd), l’aire motrice supplémentaire (SMA) et les aires pariétales 1, 2 et 5. Pour se faire, nous avons combiné des approches électrophysiologiques et anatomiques chez trois singes naïfs du Nouveau Monde (Cebus apella) pour examiner l’organisation et la spécificité topographique des projections corticales dans M1. Nos résultats indiquent que quatre sous-régions à l’intérieur de la région dédiée à la main reçoivent des inputs prédominants de différentes aires sensorimotrices. Ces résultats suggèrent que des sous-régions de M1 puissent avoir des fonctions spécifiques pour le contrôle moteur de la main et des doigts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research→French-language works237,207→