Sensorimotor reorganization in visual cortex in brain-damaged individuals with primary somatosensory damage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cortical reorganization after lesions to primary somatosensory cortex (S1) has been studied extensively in animal models, yet little is known regarding post-stroke sensorimotor plasticity in humans. We examined two brain-damaged individuals, LS and RF, who suffered lesions in the hand area of right S1 and posterior parietal cortex with spared motor cortex. Behavioral investigations revealed expected deficits in tactile detection and tactile localization in the contralesional limb in both patients, while the ability to perform simple hand movements was preserved. We then conducted functional neuroimaging experiments in which they received tactile stimulation or performed hand movements (opening-closing the fist). For LS, whose damage encompassed the entire hand area of S1, tactile stimulation on the contralesional right hand activated secondary somatosensory area (S2) and middle temporal gyrus. RF’s lesion was slightly different with a spared strip of S1 along the posterior bank of the central sulcus. When presented with tactile stimuli, she demonstrated activation in spared S1. When moving the contralesional hand, RF showed bilateral activity in sensorimotor cortex, whereas LS showed stronger activation in bilateral putamen and deactivation in ipsilateral cerebellum, indicating reweighting in the motor system. Surprisingly, when moving the contralesional hand, both patients showed significantly greater activation in lateral occipital cortex compared to eight age-matched controls. These results suggest the recruitment of body representations in visual areas after damage to somatosensory cortex, either due to increased visual imagery of the limbs due to reduced sensory feedback or some form of post-stroke plasticity and/or reweighting.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".