Responding for sucrose and wheel-running reinforcement: effect of D-amphetamine
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
The present study assessed the effect of D-amphetamine on responding maintained by wheel-running and sucrose reinforcement. Six male albino Wistar rats were placed in running wheels and exposed to a fixed-interval 30-s schedule that produced either a drop of 5% sucrose solution or the opportunity to run for 15 s as reinforcing consequences for lever pressing. Each reinforcer type was signaled by a different stimulus. Doses of 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 3.0 mg/kg D-amphetamine were administered by i.p. injection 20 min prior to a session. As the dose increased, index of curvature values decreased toward zero and rate-dependency plots revealed increases in lower rates early in the interval and decreases in higher rates toward the end of the interval. Effects were similar in the presence of both stimuli. However, an analysis of post-reinforcement pauses and local response rates broken down by transitions revealed a differential effect. As the dose increased, local response rates following a wheel-running reinforcer were affected more than those following a sucrose reinforcer.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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