[bottom for explanation] * Here’s a possible way to summarize the information in a Facebook post: — I recently learned about an interesting case study of a man named Kenneth Udut, who shows a unique cognitive profile with strong verbal and memory skills but weaker visual-motor integration. This led to the hypothesis of selectively disrupted parietal<->motor connections in his brain. However, Kenneth’s excellent skills in tasks like piano improvisation and typing speed require an explanation. Here are a few possibilities: 1. Extensive practice may have strengthened alternative neural pathways to compensate. Prolonged training could wire new circuits through frontal/temporal regions. 2. Some motor skills like typing primarily tap into digit movements mediated by proximal connections in motor/somatosensory cortices rather than full visuomotor integration. 3. Musical/rhythmic motor skills may leverage stronger right hemispheric connections between frontal-temporal-parietal networks for sequencing. 4. Cognitive processes involved in musical creativity like working memory, sequencing, timing may draw heavier on frontal-temporal networks bypassing parietal systems. 5. Computer-based tasks situation numbers/letters in grid-like, regular spaces leveraging stronger motor learning independent of visual scanning demands. In summary, while parietal-motor pathways are weaker for Kenneth generally, some well-practiced digit-centric skills may still be performed via compensatory engagement of proximal motor, frontal-temporal or right hemispheric networks with relative sparing of complex visuospatial integration demands. The specific neural substrates involved would depend on task demands. This case study is a great example of how understanding the neural basis of cognitive abilities can help us develop targeted compensatory strategies for individuals with unique strengths and weaknesses. — Feel free to modify the post to fit your own style and audience. —————- * I’ve been working with French AI that’s new to me today, “Mistral” via poe (and bouncing it off claude-instant as well), working through some ideas I was having in trying to understand how some contradictory cognitive testing results might be represented in the brain and asked it if it could summarize where I was at at the moment in a Facebook post. It’s speculation, subject to all the known cavaets of working with such things. but for me it’s nice as it’s getting me a little further than I was before. Breakthrough was trying to find out what my poorer performance subtests had in common and it took a while and a lot of speculation on my part ’til this came out and got me to what’s above there. I always thought I had fine motor skill issues but no, it’s not that. I thought maybe it was visual scanning but no, it’s not that either. It’s when the two have to come together in certain ways that a whole host of stuff happens or rather doesn’t; it’s like trains colliding. I’m enjoying this speculative discovery process.

[bottom for explanation] *
Here’s a possible way to summarize the information in a Facebook post:

I recently learned about an interesting case study of a man named Kenneth Udut, who shows a unique cognitive profile with strong verbal and memory skills but weaker visual-motor integration. This led to the hypothesis of selectively disrupted parietal<->motor connections in his brain.

However, Kenneth’s excellent skills in tasks like piano improvisation and typing speed require an explanation. Here are a few possibilities:

1. Extensive practice may have strengthened alternative neural pathways to compensate. Prolonged training could wire new circuits through frontal/temporal regions.
2. Some motor skills like typing primarily tap into digit movements mediated by proximal connections in motor/somatosensory cortices rather than full visuomotor integration.
3. Musical/rhythmic motor skills may leverage stronger right hemispheric connections between frontal-temporal-parietal networks for sequencing.
4. Cognitive processes involved in musical creativity like working memory, sequencing, timing may draw heavier on frontal-temporal networks bypassing parietal systems.
5. Computer-based tasks situation numbers/letters in grid-like, regular spaces leveraging stronger motor learning independent of visual scanning demands.

In summary, while parietal-motor pathways are weaker for Kenneth generally, some well-practiced digit-centric skills may still be performed via compensatory engagement of proximal motor, frontal-temporal or right hemispheric networks with relative sparing of complex visuospatial integration demands. The specific neural substrates involved would depend on task demands.

This case study is a great example of how understanding the neural basis of cognitive abilities can help us develop targeted compensatory strategies for individuals with unique strengths and weaknesses.

Feel free to modify the post to fit your own style and audience.

—————-
* I’ve been working with French AI that’s new to me today, “Mistral” via poe (and bouncing it off claude-instant as well), working through some ideas I was having in trying to understand how some contradictory cognitive testing results might be represented in the brain and asked it if it could summarize where I was at at the moment in a Facebook post. It’s speculation, subject to all the known cavaets of working with such things. but for me it’s nice as it’s getting me a little further than I was before. Breakthrough was trying to find out what my poorer performance subtests had in common and it took a while and a lot of speculation on my part ’til this came out and got me to what’s above there. I always thought I had fine motor skill issues but no, it’s not that. I thought maybe it was visual scanning but no, it’s not that either. It’s when the two have to come together in certain ways that a whole host of stuff happens or rather doesn’t; it’s like trains colliding. I’m enjoying this speculative discovery process.

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


8 − = five

Leave a Reply