Phylogenetic comparative analysis of the cerebello-cerebral system in 34 species highlights primate-general expansion of cerebellar crura I-II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reciprocal connections between the cerebellum and the cerebrum have been suggested to simultaneously play a role in brain size increase and to support a broad array of brain functions in primates. The cerebello-cerebral system has undergone marked functionally relevant reorganization. In particular, the lateral cerebellar lobules crura I-II (the ansiform) have been suggested to be expanded in hominoids. Here, we manually segmented 63 cerebella (34 primate species; 9 infraorders) and 30 ansiforms (13 species; 8 infraorders) to understand how their volumes have evolved over the primate lineage. Together, our analyses support proportional cerebellar-cerebral scaling, whereas ansiforms have expanded faster than the cerebellum and cerebrum. We did not find different scaling between strepsirrhines and haplorhines, nor between apes and non-apes. In sum, our study shows primate-general structural reorganization of the ansiform, relative to the cerebello-cerebral system, which is relevant for specialized brain functions in an evolutionary context.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".