Effects of post-training heroin and d-amphetamine on consolidation of win-stay learning and fear conditioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been proposed that the reinforcing properties of drugs of abuse are due, in part, to their ability to enhance memory consolidation. To test this hypothesis, heroin (0.03-3 mg/kg, SC) and d-amphetamine (0.5-2 mg/kg, SC) were administered to male Sprague-Dawley rats immediately or 4 h after training on win-stay and fear conditioning tasks. On the win-stay, immediate post-training administration of lower doses of heroin and d-amphetamine enhanced acquisition, and probe tests further revealed that these drugs enhanced different aspects of learning. Higher doses had no effect or impaired performance, particularly when administered repeatedly. On fear conditioning, the memory-enhancing effects of immediate post-training administration of lower heroin and d-amphetamine doses were revealed only when a single tone-shock pairing procedure was employed. Therefore, under appropriate experimental conditions, mildly stimulatory doses of heroin and d-amphetamine enhanced the acquisition of tasks thought to involve different types of learning. These results support the hypothesis that one of the ways in which drugs of abuse such as opiates and psychomotor stimulants reinforce behavior is by enhancing memory consolidation processes.
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".