standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| second reading | alternatives | an independent re-reading of a facet, recorded whether or not it agrees |
| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| object of study | object_of_study | what the paper is about — the thing it investigates |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 8 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
This record holds no controls. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| object_of_study | Amalric and Dehaene's fMRI comparison of expert mathematicians with non-mathematicians, read for what it settles about the relation between mathematics and language in the brain. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | object_of_study | the paper's words | |
| claim_type | critique Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | mathematical expertise Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | review Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: review | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | The commentary's own Neurosynth analysis supports the dissociation independently: regions reported alongside the term numerical are largely separate from those reported alongside language Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[2] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | The overlap between advanced mathematical reflection and simple calculation is read as evidence that expertise is built on elementary symbolic number circuits rather than separate from them Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[3] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | Expertise may reorganise the ventral visual stream, with gains for formulas and digits accompanied by reduced response to faces Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[4] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | The commentary's own alternative account: expertise may change where attention goes rather than which systems are recruited, and the design cannot separate the two Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[5] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | A test is proposed that would separate them - compare mathematicians on mathematics with experts in another field on their own domain Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[6] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The commentary bounds its own conclusion: language may still matter for the acquisition of expertise, or via connectivity rather than direct recruitment. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the commentary's own reading of the language result: LANGUAGE MAY HAVE PLAYED A ROLE IN THE INITIAL ACQUISITION OF MATHEMATICAL EXPERTISE OR ... AT THE LEVEL OF FUNCTIONAL CONNECTIVITY WITH LANGUAGE AREAS ... RATHER THAN THROUGH THEIR DIRECT RECRUITMENT | limitations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The evidence discussed is correlational and cannot establish that expertise causes the reported plastic changes. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: any causal reading of the expertise-related differences: SUCH CORRELATIONAL DATA CANNOT BE USED TO INFER CAUSALITY | limitations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The commentary's own caution, echoing the original authors: the expertise-related brain differences are correlational and cannot establish causality Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. duplicate of: limitations[1] · what this limits: the same scope as limitations[1], and it is an amplification rather than a new objection: AS AMALRIC AND DEHAENE ACKNOWLEDGE | limitations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Genetic differences between the groups are as compatible with the data as expertise-driven plasticity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the plasticity interpretation specifically: IT IS EQUALLY PLAUSIBLE THAT GENETIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXPERT MATHEMATICIANS AND NONMATHEMATICIANS AFFECT THE ORGANIZATION OF THE VENTRAL VISUAL STREAM | limitations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The refutation of the language hypothesis is qualified in two ways the data cannot reach Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the same scope as limitations[0] - the refutation of the language hypothesis is qualified in two ways these data cannot reach | limitations[4] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Whether the link to elementary number extends to nonsymbolic representations is untested and not implied Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the extension to nonsymbolic number: A CONNECTION BETWEEN SYMBOLIC NUMBERS AND MATHEMATICAL EXPERTISE IN THE BRAIN DOES NOT NECESSARILY IMPLY THAT THE SAME IS TRUE FOR NONSYMBOLIC NUMBER PROCESSING | limitations[5] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Whether the reorganisation has behavioural consequences is left as an open question Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the functional significance of the reorganisation: DOES A REDUCED RESPONSE TO FACES TRANSLATE INTO POORER FACE-PROCESSING SKILLS AMONG EXPERT MATHEMATICIANS? | limitations[6] | the tagger's words | |
| senses | number processing - symbolic: numerals and written formulas, which the commented study ties to advanced mathematics Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | number processing - nonsymbolic: quantity as in dot arrays, shared with other species, and explicitly NOT covered by the result Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | expertise effect - domain-general: attention, working memory and difficulty, which the frontoparietal network also serves Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | expertise effect - domain-specific: information processing particular to the domain, which is the reading the commented paper needs and the design cannot yet secure Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | the language claim - Hurford's strong form: numeracy is impossible without language Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | the language claim - the surviving weak forms: language may matter for ACQUIRING expertise, or through connectivity rather than recruitment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| alternatives | phenomenon: mathematical expertise Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading reaching the same value. Recorded: mathematical expertise — note: a second reading reaching the same value from a different sentence. Not applied - a person decides. | alternatives.phenomenon | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Amalric & Dehaene, "Origins of the brain networks for advanced mathematics in expert mathematicians" (PNAS 2016) - the companion article this piece comments on Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | contradicts → Hurford (ref. 7, p. 305), "without language, no numeracy" Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | critiques → Hurford's claim that there is no numeracy without language Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | supports → Amalric and Dehaene (2016), the commented paper Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | supports → Dehaene and Cohen's prediction of a visual number form area Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[4] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | critiques → the early structural studies of Einstein's brain Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[5] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | EVIDENCE CORRECTED (RE-GROUNDED) · mathematical expertise —distinct-from→ language Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. EVIDENCE CORRECTED: RE-GROUNDED. The old span named only the brain regions. This sentence names both and states the distinction AS THE FIELD'S OPEN DISAGREEMENT - some argue language is the basis, others that the abilities are nonverbal - which is a more honest ground for 'distinct-from' than an assertion. — strength of the relation: 0.9
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span writes 'expert mathematicians', not 'mathematical expertise'. also in: mathematical expertise · language | concept_edges[0] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | symbolic number processing —part-of→ mathematical expertise Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.9
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span reports a CONNECTION between the circuits for elementary number processing and higher mathematics; part-of is loose. also in: symbolic number processing · mathematical expertise | concept_edges[1] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | nonsymbolic —distinct-from→ symbolic number processing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but endpoint by anaphora: 'symbolic numbers' = symbolic number processing (previous sentence); the span says a connection 'does not necessarily imply' the same for nonsymbolic processing; distinct-from is loose. also in: nonsymbolic · symbolic number processing | concept_edges[2] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | visual number form area —part-of→ ventral visual cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 also in: visual number form area · ventral visual cortex | concept_edges[3] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | visual number form area —operationalised-as→ inferior temporal gyri Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.9
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span says regions in the bilateral inferior temporal gyri respond to numerals - a LOCATION for the VNFA; operationalised-as is loose. also in: visual number form area · inferior temporal gyri | concept_edges[4] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | frontoparietal —part-of→ domain-general Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the frontoparietal regions are ASSOCIATED WITH processes not specific to mathematics; part-of 'domain-general' is loose. also in: frontoparietal · domain-general | concept_edges[5] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | Neurosynth —operationalised-as→ reverse-inference Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the reverse-inference meta-analysis was CONDUCTED USING Neurosynth; operationalised-as is loose. also in: Neurosynth · reverse-inference | concept_edges[6] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | mathematical expertise —distinct-from→ language Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: RE-GROUNDS another row of this record: the old span named ONE endpoint.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span reports a DEBATE - some argue language is the basis, others that nonverbal processes are; distinct-from is not the paper's own claim. also in: mathematical expertise · language | concept_edges[13] | 0.9 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | meta-analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: meta-analysis | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The analysis supports the finding that numerical processing is largely anatomically separate from the circuitry thought to support language. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The commentary concludes that the absence of language-area recruitment in expert mathematicians refutes the claim that high-level mathematical ability is grounded in language systems. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The commentary argues the overlap between advanced mathematical reflection and elementary number processing implies a deep continuity between rudimentary symbolic number skills and advanced mathematics. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The author qualifies the refutation: language may still matter for the initial acquisition of expertise or through functional connectivity rather than direct recruitment. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The author raises an alternative: the experts may have attended differently to mathematical statements because these are especially salient to them. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | As the original authors acknowledge, correlational data like these cannot be used to infer causality. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | the author's meta-analysis maps regions reported more often in articles whose abstracts mention 'numerical' (89 studies) than in those that do not Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | the commentary reads the result as refuting the hypothesis that higher-level mathematical abilities are grounded in the brain's language systems Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | the commentary's open question: how elementary number circuits are recruited into expertise is not addressed by the data Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | visual number form area (VNFA) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: visual number form area (VNFA) | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | visual number form area Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: visual number form area | content_tags.definitions[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | reverse-inference meta-analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: reverse-inference meta-analysis | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 89 studies — Number of studies whose abstracts mention "numerical", pooled in the author's Neurosynth map Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 885 studies — Number of studies contributing to the "language" term map in the same meta-analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 15 expert mathematicians and 15 nonmathematicians — Sample of the fMRI study the commentary evaluates Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 89 studies — abstracts mentioning 'numerical' behind the commentary's own meta-analytic map Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 885 studies — abstracts mentioning 'language' in the same analysis - ten times the numerical set Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.