Hippocampal subfields revealed through unfolding and unsupervised clustering of laminar and morphological features in 3D BigBrain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The internal structure of the human hippocampus is challenging to map using histology or neuroimaging due to its complex archicortical folding. Here, we aimed to overcome this challenge using a unique combination of three methods. First, we leveraged a histological dataset with unprecedented 3D coverage, 3D BigBrain. Second, we imposed a computational unfolding framework that respects the topological continuity of hippocampal subfields, which are traditionally defined by laminar composition. Third, we adapted neocortical parcellation techniques to map the hippocampus with respect to not only laminar but also morphological features. Unsupervised clustering of these features revealed subdivisions that closely resemble ground-truth manual subfield segmentations. Critically, we also show that morphological features alone are sufficient to derive most hippocampal subfield boundaries. Moreover, some features showed differences within subfields along the hippocampal longitudinal axis. Our findings highlight new characteristics of internal hippocampal structure, and offer new avenues for its characterization with in-vivo neuroimaging.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".