Functional connectivity of hippocampal and prefrontal networks during episodic and spatial memory based on real‐world environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several recent studies have compared episodic and spatial memory in neuroimaging paradigms in order to understand better the contribution of the hippocampus to each of these tasks. In the present study, we build on previous findings showing common neural activation in default network areas during episodic and spatial memory tasks based on familiar, real-world environments (Hirshhorn et al. (2012) Neuropsychologia 50:3094-3106). Following previous demonstrations of the presence of functionally connected sub-networks within the default network, we performed seed-based functional connectivity analyses to determine how, depending on the task, the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex differentially couple with one another and with distinct whole-brain networks. We found evidence for a medial prefrontal-parietal network and a medial temporal lobe network, which were functionally connected to the prefrontal and hippocampal seeds, respectively, regardless of the nature of the memory task. However, these two networks were functionally connected with one another during the episodic memory task, but not during spatial memory tasks. Replicating previous reports of fractionation of the default network into stable sub-networks, this study also shows how these sub-networks may flexibly couple and uncouple with one another based on task demands. These findings support the hypothesis that episodic memory and spatial memory share a common medial temporal lobe-based neural substrate, with episodic memory recruiting additional prefrontal sub-networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".