Common neural substrates of diverse neurodevelopmental disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurodevelopmental disorders are categorized and studied according to their manifestations as distinct syndromes. For instance, congenital prosopagnosia and dyslexia have largely non-overlapping research literatures and clinical pathways for diagnosis and intervention. On the other hand, the high incidence of neurodevelopmental comorbidities or co-existing extreme strengths and weaknesses suggest that transdiagnostic commonalities may be greater than currently appreciated. The core-periphery model holds that brain regions within the stable core perceptual and motor regions are more densely connected to one another compared to regions in the flexible periphery comprising multimodal association regions. This model provides a framework for the interpretation of neural data in normal development and clinical disorders. Considering network-level commonalities reported in studies of neurodevelopmental disorders, variability in multimodal association cortex connectivity may reflect a shared origin of seemingly distinct neurodevelopmental disorders. This framework helps to explain both comorbidities in neurodevelopmental disorders and profiles of strengths and weaknesses attributable to competitive processing between cognitive systems within an individual.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".