MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406075237 · doi:10.59390/ztve5756

Historical Depictions of the Brain: The Origins from the Non-Western World

2024· article· en· W4406075237 on OpenAlexaff
Tareq Yousef

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistory of Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroanatomyMainstreamHistoryCognitive scienceNeurosciencePsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Any written work concerning the history of neuroanatomy would be difficult to imagine without acknowledging the pioneering works of Santiago Ramón y Cajal and Camillo Golgi. Cajal improved upon Golgi's staining technique at the turn of the 20th century. He implemented it to deliver the world's first incredibly detailed visualizations of cellular networks of the nervous system. Dating further back to the 15th century, most students of neuroanatomy or of the philosophy of science are familiar with René Decartes' depiction of mind-body dualism which illustrates the passing of visual information to the brain. These illustrations (i.e., mostly Cajal's) have gone on to significantly influence future research, commonly featured as visual aids in neuroscience presentations. Like most of the historical depictions of the brain, including medieval illustrations of trepanning, these drawings are of western European origin. Little, if any work has attempted to compile or assess historical depictions of the brain from outside of the western world. It is very likely that non-western historical depictions of the brain exist, but are less popularized and have been scarce in the circulating historical literature. Thus, more historical investigations are required to balance these views for a complete historical lens on neuroanatomy. Since early civilizations existed far across the globe, it is likely that depictions of the nervous system have existed before the aforementioned scholars who make up the mainstream approach to neuroanatomy history education. The present work aims to introduce students and instructors of neuroscience, and particularly neuroanatomy, to other early illustrated neuroanatomical works which may be less popularized. Additionally, this assessment seeks to provide a deeper understanding of the historical emergence of neuroscience and more specifically, neuroanatomy. This article attempts to start this conversation, utilizing what are thought to be the first modern neuroanatomical analyses of some of the cited illustrations from the non-western world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Undergraduate Neuroscience EducationSame topicHistory of Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207