Fifty Years of Prefrontal Cortex Research: Impact on Assessment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our knowledge of the functions of the prefrontal cortex, often called executive, supervisory, or control, has been transformed over the past 50 years. After operationally defining terms for clarification, we review the impact of advances in functional, structural, and theoretical levels of understanding upon neuropsychological assessment practice as a means of identifying 11 principles/challenges relating to assessment of executive function. Three of these were already known 50 years ago, and 8 have been confirmed or emerged since. Key themes over this period have been the emergence of the use of naturalistic tests to address issues of "ecological validity"; discovery of the complexity of the frontal lobe control system; invention of new tests for clinical use; development of key theoretical frameworks that address the issue of the role of prefrontal cortex systems in the organization of human cognition; the move toward considering brain systems rather than brain regions; the advent of functional neuroimaging, and its emerging integration into clinical practice. Despite these huge advances, however, practicing neuropsychologists are still desperately in need of new ways of measuring executive function. We discuss pathways by which this might happen, including decoupling the two levels of explanation (information processing; brain structure) and integrating very recent technological advances into the neuropsychologist's toolbox. (JINS, 2017, 23, 755-767).
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it