MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Human larynx motor cortices coordinate respiration for vocal-motor control

2021· article· en· W3162498183 on OpenAlex
Michel Belyk, R. Michael Brown, Deryk S. Beal, Alard Roebroeck, Carolyn McGettigan, Stella Guldner, Sonja A. Kotz

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilDirectorate for Biological SciencesUniversiteit MaastrichtNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekEuropean Research CouncilStichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie
KeywordsLarynxMotor cortexNeuroscienceFunctional magnetic resonance imagingSingingMotor controlPsychologyAnatomyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vocal flexibility is a hallmark of the human species, most particularly the capacity to speak and sing. This ability is supported in part by the evolution of a direct neural pathway linking the motor cortex to the brainstem nucleus that controls the larynx the primary sound source for communication. Early brain imaging studies demonstrated that larynx motor cortex at the dorsal end of the orofacial division of motor cortex (dLMC) integrated laryngeal and respiratory control, thereby coordinating two major muscular systems that are necessary for vocalization. Neurosurgical studies have since demonstrated the existence of a second larynx motor area at the ventral extent of the orofacial motor division (vLMC) of motor cortex. The vLMC has been presumed to be less relevant to speech motor control, but its functional role remains unknown. We employed a novel ultra-high field (7T) magnetic resonance imaging paradigm that combined singing and whistling simple melodies to localise the larynx motor cortices and test their involvement in respiratory motor control. Surprisingly, whistling activated both 'larynx areas' more strongly than singing despite the reduced involvement of the larynx during whistling. We provide further evidence for the existence of two larynx motor areas in the human brain, and the first evidence that laryngeal-respiratory integration is a shared property of both larynx motor areas. We outline explicit predictions about the descending motor pathways that give these cortical areas access to both the laryngeal and respiratory systems and discuss the implications for the evolution of speech.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.285 · 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