Dissociating the role of the caudate nucleus and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in the monitoring of events within human working memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is evidence that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is involved in the monitoring of information held in memory whether it is self-ordered or externally triggered. However, the functional contribution of the caudate nucleus in the monitoring of events has not yet been studied. We have previously proposed that the striatum is involved when a novel self-initiated action needs to be generated. The present study aimed to test the hypothesis that the caudate nucleus is significantly more required when the monitoring is self-ordered as opposed to externally triggered. Self-ordered monitoring refers to keeping track of which items have been selected so far in order to perform the current selection. Externally triggered monitoring refers to keeping track of which items have been selected by an outside source. Thirteen healthy young adults were scanned using functional magnetic resonance imaging while performing a monitoring task with three conditions: self-ordered, externally triggered and recognition. As predicted, a significant increase of activity was found in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex bilaterally when the self-ordered and externally triggered conditions were compared with the recognition condition. Most importantly, significantly increased activity was found in the right caudate nucleus when comparing the self-ordered with the recognition condition or with the externally triggered condition, but not when comparing the externally triggered with the recognition condition. We suggest that the caudate nucleus is involved in the planning of a self-initiated novel action, especially when no clear indication is given for the response choice, and that this may be the case across different domains of cognition.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".