Dysfunctional cerebello-cerebral network associated with vocal emotion recognition impairments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vocal emotion recognition, a key determinant to analyzing a speaker's emotional state, is known to be impaired following cerebellar dysfunctions. Nevertheless, its possible functional integration in the large-scale brain network subtending emotional prosody recognition has yet to be explored. We administered an emotional prosody recognition task to patients with right versus left-hemispheric cerebellar lesions and a group of matched controls. We explored the lesional correlates of vocal emotion recognition in patients through a network-based analysis by combining a neuropsychological approach for lesion mapping with normative brain connectome data. Results revealed impaired recognition among patients for neutral or negative prosody, with poorer sadness recognition performances by patients with right cerebellar lesion. Network-based lesion-symptom mapping revealed that sadness recognition performances were linked to a network connecting the cerebellum with left frontal, temporal, and parietal cortices. Moreover, when focusing solely on a subgroup of patients with right cerebellar damage, sadness recognition performances were associated with a more restricted network connecting the cerebellum to the left parietal lobe. As the left hemisphere is known to be crucial for the processing of short segmental information, these results suggest that a corticocerebellar network operates on a fine temporal scale during vocal emotion decoding.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".