Taking the brakes off the learning curve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motor learning is characterized by patterns of cerebello-striato-cortical activations shifting in time, yet the early dynamic and function of these activations remains unclear. Five groups of subjects underwent either continuous or intermittent theta-burst stimulation of one cerebellar hemisphere, or no stimulation just before learning a new motor sequence during fMRI scanning. We identified three phases during initial learning: one rapid, one slow, and one quasi-asymptotic performance phase. These phases were not changed by left cerebellar stimulation. Right cerebellar inhibition, however, accelerated learning and enhanced brain activation in critical motor learning-related areas during the first phase, continuing with reduced brain activation but high-performance in late phase. Right cerebellar excitation did not affect the early learning process, but slowed learning significantly in late phase, along with increased brain activation. We conclude that the right cerebellum is a key factor coordinating other neuronal loops in the early acquisition of an explicit motor sequential skill. Hum Brain Mapp 38:1676-1691, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".