MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599116928 · doi:10.1111/ejn.13564

Is territorial expansion a mechanism for crossmodal plasticity?

2017· article· en· W2599116928 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Alex Meredith, H. Ruth Clemo, Stephen G. Lomber

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMultisensory perception and integration
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthVirginia Commonwealth University
KeywordsCrossmodalNeuroscienceSensory systemSulcusSuperior temporal sulcusMechanism (biology)NeuroplasticityPsychologyBiologyAnatomyPerceptionVisual perceptionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crossmodal plasticity is the phenomenon whereby, following sensory damage or deprivation, the lost sensory function of a brain region is replaced by one of the remaining senses. One of several proposed mechanisms for this phenomenon involves the expansion of a more active brain region at the expense of another whose sensory inputs have been damaged or lost. This territorial expansion hypothesis was examined in the present study. The cat ectosylvian visual area (AEV) borders the auditory field of the anterior ectosylvian sulcus (FAES), which becomes visually reorganized in the early deaf. If this crossmodal effect in the FAES is due to the expansion of the adjoining AEV into the territory of the FAES after hearing loss, then the reorganized FAES should exhibit connectional features characteristic of the AEV. However, tracer injections revealed significantly different patterns of cortical connectivity between the AEV and the early deaf FAES, and substantial cytoarchitectonic and behavioral distinctions occur as well. Therefore, the crossmodal reorganization of the FAES cannot be mechanistically attributed to the expansion of the adjoining cortical territory of the AEV and an overwhelming number of recent studies now support unmasking of existing connections as the operative mechanism underlying crossmodal plasticity.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicMultisensory perception and integrationFrench-language works237,207