ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2020
Does the Cerebellum Implement or Select Geometries? A Speculative Note.
Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brain's geometries for movements and beauty judgments. A contribution of topos geometries.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- A geometry- and muscle-based control architecture for synthesising biological movement.Biological cybernetics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During evolution, living systems, actively interacting with their environment, developed the ability, through sensorimotor contingencies, to construct functional spaces shaping their perception and their movements. These geometries were modularly embedded in specific functional neuro-architectures. In particular, human movements were shown to obey several empirical laws, such as the 2/3 power law, isochrony, or jerk minimization principles, which constrain and adapt motor planning and execution. Outstandingly, such laws can be deduced from a combination of Euclidean, affine, and equi-affine geometries, whose neural correlates have been partly detected in several brain areas including the cerebellum and the basal ganglia. Reviving Pellionisz and Llinas general hypothesis regarding the cerebrum and the cerebellum as geometric machines, we speculate that the cerebellum should be involved in implementing and/or selecting task-specific geometries for motor and cognitive skills. More precisely, the cerebellum is assumed to compute forward internal models to help specific cortical and subcortical regions to select appropriate geometries among, at least, Euclidean and affine geometries. We emphasize that the geometrical role of the cerebellum deserves a renewal of interest, which may provide a better understanding of its specific contributions to motor and associative (cognitive) functions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31898281What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.