Sulcation of the intraparietal sulcus is related to symbolic but not non-symbolic number skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the constraints, including biological ones, that may influence mathematical development is of great importance because math ability is a key predictor of career success, income and even psychological well-being. While research in developmental cognitive neuroscience of mathematics has extensively studied the key functional regions for processing numbers, particularly the horizontal segment of intraparietal sulcus (HIPS), few studies have investigated the effects of early cerebral constraints on later mathematical abilities. In this pre-registered study, we investigated whether variability of the sulcal pattern of the HIPS, a qualitative feature of the brain determined in-utero and not affected by brain maturation and learning, accounts for individual difference in symbolic and non-symbolic number abilities. Seventy-seven typically developing school-aged children and 21 young adults participated in our study. We found that the HIPS sulcal pattern, (a) explains part of the variance in participant's symbolic number comparison and math fluency abilities, and (b) that this association between HIPS sulcal pattern and symbolic number abilities was found to be stable from childhood to young adulthood. However, (c) we did not find an association between participant's non-symbolic number abilities and HIPS sulcal morphology. Our findings suggest that early cerebral constraints may influence individual difference in math abilities, in addition to the well-established neuroplastic factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".