Editorial: The Vestibular System in Cognitive and Memory Processes in
Bibliographic record
Abstract
vestibular system and its peripheral organs while Robert Barany, rewarded by the Nobel prize in 1914, was the first to investigate vestibular disorders with caloric tests making surgical treatments of the vestibular organ possible. Recently, Graf and Klam (2006) have reminded us that this ancient sensory system appeared more than 500 million years ago. Logically its influence would most likely not be restricted to balance reflexes at the brainstem level; it must have also shaped our brain. The vestibular system is the one sensory organ dedicated to gravity perception, which along with light and oxygen served as a motor of evolution. In the 1950s the groups of Otto–Joachim Grüsser in Germany,Wilder Penfield in Canada, and later the group of Alain Berthoz in France, demonstrated in elegant experiments on awake monkey (Guldin and Grüsser, 1998), epileptic patient (Penfield, 1957), and neurologically-normal human (Lobel et al., 1999) the existence of vestibular projections to the cortex and how they combine with visual and proprioceptive information. An increasing
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.018 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.013 |
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".