Dorsal/ventral hippocampus, fornix, and conditioned place preference
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conditioned place preference (CPP) is a learning paradigm requiring formation of associations between reward and particular locations. White and McDonald (Behav Brain Res 1993;55:269-281) demonstrated that amygdala (AMG) lesions impair, while fornix (Fx) lesions enhance learning of this task. In the present experiments, we replicated the effects of AMG and Fx lesions, but we also found that complete hippocampal (HPC) lesions interfere with normal performance. Thus, the effects of Fx and HPC lesions on CPP are opposite. This is in contrast with spatial learning in the water maze. Because it has been demonstrated that damage of dorsal HPC interferes to a greater extent with spatial learning than damage of ventral HPC, we also tested animals with either dorsal or ventral HPC disruptions on CPP. Lesions limited to dorsal HPC were followed by impairment on this task. In contrast, lesions limited to ventral HPC resulted in enhanced learning. We argue that Fx and HPC lesions do not have interchangeable effects in all learning paradigms. To explain the complex pattern of results presently obtained, we propose a novel hypothesis regarding behavioral functions of HPC neural circuits. Implications regarding the interaction between memory systems are also considered.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it