The universe is asymmetric, the mouse brain too
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hemispheric brain asymmetry is a basic organizational principle of the human brain and has been implicated in various psychiatric conditions, including autism spectrum disorder. Brain asymmetry is not a uniquely human feature and is observed in other species such as the mouse. Yet, asymmetry patterns are generally nuanced, and substantial sample sizes are required to detect these patterns. In this pre-registered study, we use a mouse dataset from the Province of Ontario Neurodevelopmental Network, which comprises structural MRI data from over 2000 mice, including genetic models for autism spectrum disorder, to reveal the scope and magnitude of hemispheric asymmetry in the mouse. Our findings demonstrate the presence of robust hemispheric asymmetry in the mouse brain, such as larger right hemispheric volumes towards the anterior pole and larger left hemispheric volumes toward the posterior pole, opposite to what has been shown in humans. This suggests the existence of species-specific traits. Further clustering analysis identified distinct asymmetry patterns in autism spectrum disorder models, a phenomenon that is also seen in atypically developing participants. Our study shows potential for the use of mouse models in studying the biological bases of typical and atypical brain asymmetry but also warrants caution as asymmetry patterns seem to differ between humans and mice.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".