Experience‐dependent recruitment of <i>Arc</i> expression in multiple systems during rest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The patterns of ensemble activity in the hippocampal formation during wakeful, attentive behavior are recapitulated during subsequent resting states. This replay of activity has also been found in several brain regions across many species, indicating a very general biological phenomenon. Concomitantly, transcription of immediate-early genes (IEGs) such as Arc also reoccurs in the same hippocampal neurons, suggesting that IEGs contribute to "off-line" consolidation. If continued IEG expression during rest reflects a correlate of ensemble replay, then the same generality should be observed in IEG transcription patterns. This hypothesis was tested by examining Arc in F344 rats engaging in spatial exploration alongside a rest episode. The probability that an individual neuron participates in "constitutive" Arc expression during rest is increased by recent experience in multiple cortical regions as well as across the septal and temporal poles of the hippocampus, consistent with memory trace reactivation. That is, neurons that were recently active during spatial exploration are preferentially recruited into further Arc expression during subsequent rest. The continued Arc expression, however, occurs in only a small fraction of the cells that were engaged in transcription during previous behavior. This fraction is greatest in CA3 and progressively decreases in CA1, superficial, and deep cortical layers and is consistent with the idea that consolidation occurs rapidly in the hippocampus (centering on the CA3 recurrent network) while changes are much more gradual in neocortical synaptic 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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".